[bug#57963] Almost plain SXML serializer

[Liliana Marie Prikler]

Am Mittwoch, dem 12.10.2022 um 17:03 +0400 schrieb Andrew Tropin:
> On 2022-10-12 20:42, Taiju HIGASHI wrote:
> 
> > Andrew Tropin <andrew@trop.in> writes:
> > 
> > > On 2022-10-11 06:21, Liliana Marie Prikler wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Am Dienstag, dem 11.10.2022 um 12:54 +0900 schrieb Taiju
> > > > HIGASHI:
> > > > > We can specify invalid value such as (list "foo" '(foo bar)
> > > > > 123).
> > > > It will be sanitized before that.
> > > > 
> > > > > > Also, making multi-type fields is debatable, but isn't
> > > > > > great IMO.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I see. If we had to choose one or the other, I would prefer
> > > > > the
> > > > > string-type field.
> > > > Prefer sexp-type.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Current (v5) extra-config has a list type.  This list can contain
> > > strings
> > > and nested lists, string elements are for raw XML, and list
> > > elements are for SXML.
> > > 
> > > This is done I guess to support following use case:
> > > 
> > > (list "<tag>Already existing XML copied from existing .xml file,
> > > which
> > > we don't want to rewrite to SXML.</tag>"
> > >       '((tag (@ (attr1 "value1")
> > >                 (attr2 "value2"))
> > >              (nested "Part of the configuration defined with
> > > SXML")
> > >              (empty)))
> > >       "<another-tag>Maybe some other part of raw XML</another-
> > > tag>")
> > > 
> > > This way we can combine SXML with already existing raw XML.
> > > 
> > > Am I right?
> > 
> > You're right.  The current implementation allows XML string and
> > SXML
> > list in the list.  Also, it can mix those.
> > 
> 
> Ok, that means we can cover this use case, but at the same time have
> more functionality, clarity and consistency.
> 
> We can make extra-config to be SXML only (with G-exps support), this
> way we will achieve not only the same functionality, but will get
> more advanced features like referencing files/directiories in the
> /gnu/store or generating parts of configuration using full-fledged
> scheme (the simpliest example is just reading the content of the
> existing file-like object or using format to generate "raw XML" and
> insert it in arbitrary place of SXML tree).
> 
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> (list #~"<tag>Already existing XML copied from existing .xml file,
> which
> we don't want to rewrite to SXML.</tag>"
>       `((tag (@ (attr1 "value1")
>                 (attr2 "value2"))
>              (nested "Part of the configuration defined with SXML")
>              ,#~(format #f "    <nested-tag>~a</nested-tag>"
> #$variable)
>              (fontdirs
>               (dirs ,(file-append font-iosevka "/share/fonts")))
>              (empty)))
>       #~(call-with-input-file #$(local-file "old.xml") get-string-
> all)
>       #~"<another-tag>Maybe some other part of raw XML</another-
> tag>")
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
> 
> Liliana, Ludo what do you think?
I think the mockup implementation is a little unclear.  Do you mean
that G-Expressions should imply a string that is to be parsed?  Because
note that gexp->sexp exists and you could likewise #~(sxml->xml #$some-
file-in-the-store) imho.

Cheers