Security and reproducible-build progress in Guix 0.11

Posted Aug 11, 2016 15:57 UTC (Thu) by servilio-ap (subscriber, #56287)
In reply to: Security and reproducible-build progress in Guix 0.11 by peterhoeg
Parent article: Security and reproducible-build progress in Guix 0.11

Though you are right regarding the implementation languages for the Nix expression interpreter, the article author was referring to the semantics of the package description languages. Don't know how accurate he is in that regards, though I don't remember any Haskell reference in the Nix expression language description in the manual.

Security and reproducible-build progress in Guix 0.11

Posted Aug 14, 2016 8:09 UTC (Sun) by gasche (subscriber, #74946) [Link]

The package description language for Guix *is* a Scheme, while the package description language for Nix is a home-made language that is not Haskell (iirc. it is dynamically typed, etc.). I don't know what you mean by "semantics" in this context.

I also remarked these lines in the article that are wrong -- nothing very serious, but still a fairly misleading claim. One argument for Guix is that Nix's language is limiting, and it would certainly have much less traction if Nix actually used Haskell.