[HN Gopher] Adding algebraic data types to Nickel
___________________________________________________________________
Adding algebraic data types to Nickel
Author : JNRowe
Score : 25 points
Date : 2024-09-06 06:19 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.tweag.io)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.tweag.io)
| pxeger1 wrote:
| How could you name a language after an element and then not use
| its chemical symbol as the file extension?? (Yes I know NCL means
| "Nickel configuration language" and can be pronounced like
| Nickel, but come on)
| jinwoo68 wrote:
| Seems to be in the same tradition as GNU being "GNU is Not
| Unix".
| Xophmeister wrote:
| There's an issue for this :)
|
| https://github.com/tweag/nickel/issues/357
| from-nibly wrote:
| I am very excited to watch this new space unfold. Its a huge hole
| in platform engineering. We need a lot of config but there often
| arent robust enough config languages so people end up resorting
| to using Turing complete languages and thats just lighting a fuse
| for your future self.
|
| Im really excited about cuelang what is everyone else keeping an
| eye on?
| mananaysiempre wrote:
| Dhall[1] also usually gets mentioned in the same sentence as
| CUE.
|
| As for Nickel, I have mixed feelings about it of the same kind
| as about ES6 classes and perhaps modules--we're taking a simple
| language (an extremely simple one, in the case of Nix) and
| baking into it some stuff that the original had as a completely
| satisfactory library, in the name of discoverability resp.
| uniformity. Seems a bit sad and unnecessary to be honest. (The
| problem of Nixpkgs and NixOS, IMO, is not Nix the language,
| which is fine for the most part, but the fact that they're a
| single giant monorepo with comparatively very little
| documentation even for the parts that basically serve as the
| Nix standard library.) Looks like my design sensibilities just
| align much better with PhD-student Eelco than with Tweag-
| engineer Eelco.
|
| [1] https://dhall-lang.org/
| kevindamm wrote:
| Dhall does seem to have more integrations but I really like
| the amount of thought that has gone into Cue's types and
| operational semantics.
| mananaysiempre wrote:
| I agree. If only they wrote down the
| typechecking/evaluation semantics, even if it's in the
| traditional form of a page's worth of cryptic deduction
| rules.
| Smaug123 wrote:
| Is there a particular feature in Nickel you object to? When I
| think of Nickel I imagine the merging of contracts (and not
| much else really - that seems like its big flagship feature
| to me), which seems to me like a pretty minimal necessary
| feature to model Nixpkgs idioms; is that one of the features
| you don't like?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-09-07 23:00 UTC)