3 ms·
Nobody wants an arbitrary complex program for describing some trivial build steps. A programming language here is an anti-feature. Ideal would be some DSL that
by otabdeveloper2 8y ago
Nobody wants an arbitrary complex program for describing some trivial build steps. A programming language here is an anti-feature.
Ideal would be some DSL that isn't even Turing complete, but that's not practical at the moment. Maybe we'll get there some day.
- k_bx 8y agoDhall and Dhall-nix are definitely a step towards that.
- mbrock 8y agoIt's difficult to not be Turing complete. Makefiles are Turing complete: https://nullprogram.com/blog/2016/04/30/ https://nullprogram.com/blog/2016/04/30/
- X6S1x6Okd1st 8y agoReally what no one wants is a build step that takes forever. I'm more upset about how long nix-env -i takes than what the computational complexity of the programming language is
- Nullabillity 8y agonix-env -i is slow because it has to evaluate every package definition. nix-env -iA is way faster.
- joepie91_ 8y agoThe ability to build abstractions is actually one of the key points of what makes Nix work, conceptually. So yes, a 'programming language' (how are you defining that anyway?) is absolutely a feature here.