I don't think it's completely impossible, but I can't construct
one easily as derivationStrict seems to (re)tokenize the outputs
attribute, dropping the empty output.
It's not a scenario we have to account for here.
Types converted:
- `NixStringContextElem`
- `OutputsSpec`
- `ExtendedOutputsSpec`
- `DerivationOutput`
- `DerivationType`
Existing ones mostly conforming the pattern cleaned up:
- `ContentAddressMethod`
- `ContentAddressWithReferences`
The `DerivationGoal::derivationType` field had a bogus initialization,
now caught, so I made it `std::optional`. I think #8829 can make it
non-optional again because it will ensure we always have the derivation
when we construct a `DerivationGoal`.
See that issue (#7479) for details on the general goal.
`git grep 'Raw::Raw'` indicates the two types I didn't yet convert
`DerivedPath` and `BuiltPath` (and their `Single` variants) . This is
because @roberth and I (can't find issue right now...) plan on reworking
them somewhat, so I didn't want to churn them more just yet.
Co-authored-by: Eelco Dolstra <edolstra@gmail.com>
We want to be able to write down `foo.drv^bar.drv^baz`:
`foo.drv^bar.drv` is the dynamic derivation (since it is itself a
derivation output, `bar.drv` from `foo.drv`).
To that end, we create `Single{Derivation,BuiltPath}` types, that are
very similar except instead of having multiple outputs (in a set or
map), they have a single one. This is for everything to the left of the
rightmost `^`.
`NixStringContextElem` has an analogous change, and now can reuse
`SingleDerivedPath` at the top level. In fact, if we ever get rid of
`DrvDeep`, `NixStringContextElem` could be replaced with
`SingleDerivedPath` entirely!
Important note: some JSON formats have changed.
We already can *produce* dynamic derivations, but we can't refer to them
directly. Today, we can merely express building or example at the top
imperatively over time by building `foo.drv^bar.drv`, and then with a
second nix invocation doing `<result-from-first>^baz`, but this is not
declarative. The ethos of Nix of being able to write down the full plan
everything you want to do, and then execute than plan with a single
command, and for that we need the new inductive form of these types.
Co-authored-by: Robert Hensing <roberth@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Valentin Gagarin <valentin.gagarin@tweag.io>
This should be a non-empty set, and so we don't want people doing this
by accident. We remove the zero-0 constructor with a little inheritance
trickery.
`DerivedPath::Built` and `DerivationGoal` were previously using a
regular set with the convention that the empty set means all outputs.
But it is easy to forget about this rule when processing those sets.
Using `OutputSpec` forces us to get it right.
Starts progress on #5729.
The idea is that we should not have these default methods throwing
"unimplemented". This is a small step in that direction.
I kept `addTempRoot` because it is a no-op, rather than failure. Also,
as a practical matter, it is called all over the place, while doing
other tasks, so the downcasting would be annoying.
Maybe in the future I could move the "real" `addTempRoot` to `GcStore`,
and the existing usecases use a `tryAddTempRoot` wrapper to downcast or
do nothing, but I wasn't sure whether that was a good idea so with a
bias to less churn I didn't do it yet.
I had started the trend of doing `std::visit` by value (because a type
error once mislead me into thinking that was the only form that
existed). While the optomizer in principle should be able to deal with
extra coppying or extra indirection once the lambdas inlined, sticking
with by reference is the conventional default. I hope this might even
improve performance.
This avoids an ambiguity where the `StorePathWithOutputs { drvPath, {}
}` could mean "build `brvPath`" or "substitute `drvPath`" depending on
context.
It also brings the internals closer in line to the new CLI, by
generalizing the `Buildable` type is used there and makes that
distinction already.
In doing so, relegate `StorePathWithOutputs` to being a type just for
backwards compatibility (CLI and RPC).
These are by no means part of the notion of a store, but rather are
things that happen to use stores. (Or put another way, there's no way
we'd make them virtual methods any time soon.) It's better to move them
out of that too-big class then.
Also, this helps us remove StorePathWithOutputs from the Store interface
altogether next commit.
