Re: proposal: make build failures explicit results in the store

[Florian Paul Schmidt]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 11/25/2015 10:49 PM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Florian Paul Schmidt <address@hidden> skribis:
> 
>> Oh, I wasn't even aware there was a DB. I had a more functional 
>> picture in mind where there was a map
> 
> See
> <http://www.gnu.org/software/guix/manual/html_node/The-Store.html>.
>
> 
>> package definition -> entr(y|ies) in store
> 
> The store is at a lower level, it doesn’t know about packages.

I never meant to imply that it did.

If you have a map (a function)

f: A -> B

where A is the input type and B is the result type, how could B "know
about" A? It's a completely separate type from A and the map f.

This is completely off topic from the original question, but I do
wonder how the impression that I might have implied that the store
"knows about packages" came about :)

Oh, sure, the map f might be composed of other maps like taking a
package definition to (a) derivation(s) first and then taking the
derivation(s) to (a) store entr(y|ies).

All I wanted to express was that I had a lack of knowledge about what
gets mapped to what :) The output of the map is not just one or more
store entries, but also possibly, depending on the configuration, a DB
entry which records the failure, which indeed then is a variant type
in some sense, albeit a little obscured :)

Flo

- -- 
https://fps.io
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWVviKAAoJEA5f4Coltk8ZrE4IAIbyLUODQ32JGdfVPemOgVuq
X5816EfFywW3h/ChSVOHbI6q/wZ9oPv84+R4FvGORDnGq23cGqNMVmpG0isBqzsi
hQujWMwCIDDO3TA+ih7Fm826I4eVkWeQq0fjh03FcZ+xJ370/LvHZhAnUP3g+zfx
1q4gbbgVG+IeiOkeCqXEI15v8veIPLjU30IN9LRW7ZL3K3pfofgYilQlQ2b/DPNn
4m0hRsobI9VcJY9QsySQd07QpgJ58z7ZJ/vrxed/MsZhdn/mK7xI3w4JpBy0h86J
TQW5seCRX5V1w7EkuYCT1zwtUAzMxEsuhmpGAGZJ2wUCg6YevCEE6N6M948aUq8=
=EAj3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----