Re: Proposal: A new build-system API

[Philip McGrath]

Hi,

On 9/26/22 14:07, Mája Tomášek wrote:
> For example, there's currently no guarantee
> that #:phases will contain list of functions and the error from that
> will be cryptic. Contrast that with the service-configuration API. There
> are field sanitizers that ensure that the configuration is propper and
> easily one can introspect what the build system accepts and what are the
> defaults.

This in particular is absolutely a valid point. It reminds me that there 
was some discussion a while ago about error checking/reporting generally 
in Guix in which I advocated for adopting contracts à la Racket. I'd 
started putting together a minimal implementation at the time, but I got 
diverted by other things: I'll try to get back to it.

-Philip