3 ms·
I don't know what people consider "eager" in Guix. In the `package` DSL all input fields are thunked, so they are not eagerly resolved. You don't need all val
by rekado 5y ago
I don't know what people consider "eager" in Guix. In the `package` DSL all input fields are thunked, so they are not eagerly resolved. You don't need all values of your language to have lazy semantics --- delaying evaluation of some values is enough. Just because Guile Scheme is no lazily evaluated by default does not mean that "Guix is eager" is a useful statement.
- pxc 5y agoThanks for the correction! > You don't need all values of your language to have lazy semantics Once upon a time (no longer, I think), Nix was 'maximally lazy', so I think historically at least, there has been a question of how essential laziness is to the design of package managers in the functional paradigm. Since then I guess we've seen what you describe (some targeted laziness) is all that's required in both DSLs. I've edited my comment above to better reflect Guix's design and stop spreading the 'Guix is eager' meme. :)