[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: .dir-locals.el vs. guix-devel-mode

From: Ludovic Courtès
Subject: Re: .dir-locals.el vs. guix-devel-mode
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 23:34:11 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux)

Alex Kost <address@hidden> skribis:

> Ludovic Courtès (2015-09-29 22:16 +0300) wrote:
>> Alex Kost <address@hidden> skribis:
> [...]
>>> So I think .dir-locals.el is not the proper place for indentation rules.
>>> IMHO they should be moved to "guix-devel.el" and the manual should
>>> recommend using 'guix-devel-mode' for editing guix package files as it
>>> provides the proper indenting, highlighting and some useful key
>>> bindings.
>> Yes, but I agree with Taylan: a passerby should get a reasonable setup
>> in place automatically.  That’s what I like about .dir-locals.el: it
>> allows you to make sure that a minimum set of rules is in place, which
>> in turn means that patches are more likely to come out right, which
>> means less frustration and increased happiness.
>> Using eval + load in .dir-locals.el is indeed ugly though.  So, for lack
>> of a better solution, I’m fine having some of the rules duplicated.
>> Specifically, rules for ‘package’, ‘origin’, ‘operating-system’,
>> ‘substitute*’, ‘with-store’, ‘with-monad’, ‘run-with-store’,
>> ‘run-with-state’, and ‘m…’.
>> How does that sound?
> I'd like to have them in "guix-devel.el", but I don't see the reason for
> duplicating.  I think they either should be placed in "guix-devel.el"
> (surely the right thing for me :-)) or stay in ".dir-locals.el" (I'm
> afraid the right thing for the most :-().
> Why do you suggest the duplication?

Just to make sure that anyone using Emacs will get things right, even if
they haven’t learned about guix-devel.el yet.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]