|
| ▲ | sidkshatriya an hour ago | parent | next [-] |
| +1, Guix is quite good with some tricks up it's sleeve compared to Nix. I am not a fan of S-expressions but using scheme is more reasonable than nix+bash to me. On the negative side, guix can be slow. It is also not a very pragmatic os. NixOS does non-free firmware and drivers without issue. You need to jump through some hoops for this with Guix. This is not an issue if you plan to run guix in a VM though. |
|
| ▲ | accelbred an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Does guix have a flake equivalent yet? |
|
| ▲ | rowanG077 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| I mean it's pretty wild to take s-expressions and not call them extremely terrible to read. The nix language sucks really badly, but I gladly take it over writing S-expressions. |
| |
| ▲ | Pay08 an hour ago | parent [-] | | It reads almost the exact same as any functional C-style language. Not to mention that specifically for Guix, you're going to be writing the (name value) form for 99% of it. | | |
| ▲ | rowanG077 an hour ago | parent [-] | | I don't agree at all. Just look at these derivations: https://codeberg.org/guix/guix/src/branch/master/gnu/package... I counted and you regularly see this: "))))))))))" at the end. This is not a language that is optimizing for being written by humans. | | |
| ▲ | Pay08 an hour ago | parent [-] | | That link isn't working for me (something about AI detection), but as a point of accuracy, those aren't derivations, they're simple source files. Derivations are generated out of them. As for the closing braces, would it be better if you had a newline between each? |
|
|
|
