Problem: with-node-name feels too verbose

[sjmackenzie]

To demonstrate the problem, this is what we had/still have:

  (node "new-password" ${gui.text-field})
  (edge "new-password" "out" _ "change-controls" "place" 10)
  (mesg "new-password" "in" '(init . ((label . "New password")
                                      (style . (single password)))))

notice how "new-password" is repeated many times. So this approach was developed:

  (with-node-name "new-password" (node ${gui.text-field})
                  (edge "out" "change-controls" "place" #:selection 10)
                  (mesg "in" '(init . ((label . "New password")
                                       (style . (single password))))))

It makes sense to use the word with-node instead of with-node-name.
though with-node seems clunky when sitting side-by-side (node ...) i.e.:

(with-node-name "node-name" (node {$blah}))

It would seem it's more reasonable to do this:

(with-node "new-password" ${gui.text-field}
  (edge  "new-password" "out" _ "change-controls" "place" 10)

In the case a node has already been introduced then omit the ${...}. i.e.:

(node "new-password" ${gui.text-field})

(with-node "new-password" 
  (edge  "new-password" "out" _ "change-controls" "place" 10)

[clacke]

Yes, this is a good way to do it.