[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: change to the wrap-program procedure (was: core-updates, let’s go!)
From: |
Ricardo Wurmus |
Subject: |
Re: change to the wrap-program procedure (was: core-updates, let’s go!) |
Date: |
Tue, 02 Jan 2018 20:01:53 +0100 |
User-agent: |
mu4e 1.0-alpha3; emacs 25.3.1 |
Hi Hartmut,
> Am 31.12.2017 um 18:27 schrieb Ricardo Wurmus:
>> There’s also a change to the wrap-program procedure that does without
>> the shell wrappers and instead prepends a short Guile program, which is
>> read as a comment in the target language. It’s better to play with this
>> in the next core-updates cycle.
>
> I assume, this is what we discussed in
> <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2017-11/msg00041.html>.
>
> I just wonder whether this will keep the encoding-lines in place, like
> these:
>
> #!/usr/bin/python
> # -*- coding: latin-1 -*-
> from __future__ import print_function
In the current implementation that I have here it would not.
According to the documentation[1], the regular expression
“coding[=:]\s*([-\w.]+)” must match for a comment on the second line of
a script, so I’d think that the following would still be valid:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
#!/gnu/store/…/bin/guile --no-auto-compile
#!#; -*- coding: latin-1 -*-
#\-(setenv …)
#\-(apply execl …)
#!/gnu/store/…/bin/python3
# -*- coding: latin-1 -*-
…
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
All we need to do is read the second line of the script and see if it is
a coding comment; in that case we’d place the content on the second
line. I’ll add a special case for this and a test case. Thanks for
bringing it up!
[1]:
https://docs.python.org/3/reference/lexical_analysis.html#encoding-declarations
--
Ricardo
GPG: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6 2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC
https://elephly.net