--- Begin Message ---
|
Subject: |
[PATCH] gnu: Add fold-packages-in-modules. |
|
Date: |
Tue, 29 Aug 2017 08:07:23 +0100 |
Add a more flexible variant of the fold-packages procedure, that takes a list
of the modules to work with. The existing fold-packages procedure then calls
fold-packages-in-modules with the result of the all-modules procedure.
I wrote this when looking at how to get the packages in a specific set of
modules, to create jobs for cuirass.
* gnu/packages.scm (fold-packages-in-modules): New procedure.
(fold-packages): Change to use fold-packages-in-modules.
---
gnu/packages.scm | 11 ++++++++++-
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/gnu/packages.scm b/gnu/packages.scm
index 562906178..3f0ff56b8 100644
--- a/gnu/packages.scm
+++ b/gnu/packages.scm
@@ -47,6 +47,7 @@
%bootstrap-binaries-path
%package-module-path
+ fold-packages-in-modules
fold-packages
find-packages-by-name
@@ -144,13 +145,21 @@ for system '~a'")
"Call (PROC PACKAGE RESULT) for each available package, using INIT as
the initial value of RESULT. It is guaranteed to never traverse the
same package twice."
+ (fold-packages-in-modules (all-modules (%package-module-path))
+ proc
+ init))
+
+(define (fold-packages-in-modules modules proc init)
+ "Call (PROC PACKAGE RESULT) for each available package within any of the
+modules in MODULES, using INIT as the initial value of RESULT. It is
+guaranteed to never traverse the same package twice."
(fold-module-public-variables (lambda (object result)
(if (and (package? object)
(not (hidden-package? object)))
(proc object result)
result))
init
- (all-modules (%package-module-path))))
+ modules))
(define find-packages-by-name
(let ((packages (delay
--
2.14.1
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
|
Subject: |
Re: [bug#28274] [PATCH] gnu: Add fold-packages-in-modules. |
|
Date: |
Fri, 01 Sep 2017 11:08:56 +0200 |
|
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2 (gnu/linux) |
Christopher Baines <address@hidden> skribis:
> On Thu, 31 Aug 2017 15:20:55 +0200
> address@hidden (Ludovic Courtès) wrote:
>
>> Instead of introducing a new procedure, what about simply:
>>
>>
>> diff --git a/gnu/packages.scm b/gnu/packages.scm
>> index 562906178..b4ac6661c 100644
>> --- a/gnu/packages.scm
>> +++ b/gnu/packages.scm
>> @@ -140,17 +140,19 @@ for system '~a'")
>> directory))
>> %load-path)))
>>
>> -(define (fold-packages proc init)
>> - "Call (PROC PACKAGE RESULT) for each available package, using INIT
>> as -the initial value of RESULT. It is guaranteed to never traverse
>> the -same package twice."
>> +(define* (fold-packages proc init
>> + #:optional
>> + (modules (all-modules
>> (%package-module-path))))
>> + "Call (PROC PACKAGE RESULT) for each available package defined in
>> one of +MODULES, using INIT as the initial value of RESULT. It is
>> guaranteed to never +traverse the same package twice."
>> (fold-module-public-variables (lambda (object result)
>> (if (and (package? object)
>> (not (hidden-package?
>> object))) (proc object result)
>> result))
>> init
>> - (all-modules
>> (%package-module-path))))
>> + modules))
>>
>> (define find-packages-by-name
>> (let ((packages (delay
>>
>>
>> ?
>
> This looks great. Are you set to push it up, or shall I?
Pushed, thanks!
Ludo'.
--- End Message ---