guix-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [PATCH v2] .dir-locals.el: Automatically set the GEISER-GUILE-LOAD-P


From: Miguel Ángel Arruga Vivas
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] .dir-locals.el: Automatically set the GEISER-GUILE-LOAD-PATH variable.
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 19:58:30 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux)

Hi Maxim!

Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com> writes:
> Thanks for your comments, they've already made this proposed change much
> better!

You did that, they only may have pointed somewhere, but the effort is
yours, so thank you again.

>> That cleanup seems to me responsibility of that .emacs maintainer
>> instead of something to take into account in .dir-locals. ;-)
>
> Indeed, it could be seen that way!  The good news is that it doesn't
> seem to cause any problems anyway, should they forget an entry for Guix
> there.

Cool, one thing less to worry then.

>> If there is some way this may happen, then this call is OK, but I'd try
>> to stay with a cheaper push unless it's really needed, as O(1) < O(n),
>> for almost every n. :-)
>
> The way I could easily trigger this was to open a dired buffer, and
> hitting 'g' to refresh its contents.

That usually is bind to revert-buffer, and they're being loaded again,
so you're right.  Was the definition for other modes intended?  I didn't
noticed because I copied directly the code onto scheme-mode sexp without
looking at the context, what a reviewer... ;-P

> I'll be sending a v3 with the fboundp woopsie above fixed.

I've taken a look to v3 and LGTM.  Even the answer to the question is
no, I wouldn't send another patch only for that hypothetical change.
Anybody can speak up if they have any objection; if they don't, I think
you should push the patch.

Happy hacking!
Miguel

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


reply via email to

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