bug#59747: closed ([PATCH] services: configuration: rework alist? procedure)

[GNU bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Thu, 08 Dec 2022 12:59:05 +0100
with message-id <87wn72ds3a.fsf@gnu.org>
and subject line Re: bug#59747: [PATCH] services: configuration: rework alist? 
procedure
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #59747,
regarding [PATCH] services: configuration: rework alist? procedure
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs@gnu.org.)


-- 
59747: https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=59747
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs@gnu.org with problems
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> [PATCH] services: configuration: rework alist? procedure
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Thu,  1 Dec 2022 18:09:47 +0000
>
>
>
>
> From: Bruno Victal <mirai@makinata.eu>
>
> * gnu/services/configuration.scm: rework alist? procedure
> ---
>  gnu/services/configuration.scm | 6 +++++-
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/gnu/services/configuration.scm b/gnu/services/configuration.scm
> index dacfc52ba9..5bbb032c66 100644
> --- a/gnu/services/configuration.scm
> +++ b/gnu/services/configuration.scm
> @@ -436,7 +436,11 @@ (define (list-of pred?)
>  (define list-of-strings?
>    (list-of string?))
>  
> -(define alist? list?)
> +(define alist?
> +  (match-lambda
> +    (() #t)
> +    ((and (= car head) (= cdr tail)) (and (pair? head) (alist? tail)))
> +    (_ #f)))
>  
>  (define serialize-file-like empty-serializer)
>  
>
> base-commit: 748ec628826cea3faa3679074d87fae9bc810080
> -- 
> 2.38.1
>
>
>
>
> --- End Message ---
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> Re: bug#59747: [PATCH] services: configuration: rework alist? procedure
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Thu, 08 Dec 2022 12:59:05 +0100
>
>
>
>
> User-agent: 
>
> Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux)
>
>
>
>
> mirai@makinata.eu skribis:
>
> > From: Bruno Victal <mirai@makinata.eu>
> >
> > * gnu/services/configuration.scm: rework alist? procedure
>
> I simplified it a bit and applied.
>
> Note that there are two other ‘*-alist?’ procedures…
>
> But really, it’s the kind of predicate that shouldn’t be used because
> there’s no disjoint alist data type in the first place.  It may be a
> sign that we should use records instead in those places.
>
> Thanks,
> Ludo’.
>
>
> --- End Message ---