| 21 Mar 2025 |
 @rosssmyth:matrix.org | You can do eta expansion outputs = inputs: import ./function.nix inputs; | 14:11:38 |
| @rosssmyth:matrix.org | Which tbh shows how silly the restriction is | 14:14:20 |
 @joepie91:pixie.town | wait. what? | 16:46:55 |
 elikoga | It's a Nix file with a specific format, where normal Nix files are just files that contain a nix value, Nix Flakes also have syntactic restrictions on the inputs&outputs level. | 16:48:24 |
| elikoga | * It's a Nix file with a specific format, where normal Nix files are just files that contain a nix value, flake.nix also has syntactic restrictions on the inputs&outputs level. | 16:48:36 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | then why does it end in .nix if it is not a freeform Nix file?! | 16:49:15 |
| elikoga | ? | 16:49:28 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | like, I'm sure those syntactic restrictions have a purpose, but it seems very expectation-breaking for a .nix file to suddenly expect essentially a different format because it happens to be a flake.nix | 16:49:54 |
| elikoga | ? | 16:50:09 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | I'm not sure what is unclear? | 16:50:25 |
| elikoga | What you are proposing as an alternative | 16:51:13 |
| elikoga | .i-hate-this-feature just doesn't roll of the toungue that well | 16:51:45 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | I am not proposing one; I am complaining that the current choice (of making it look like it's "just a Nix file" was the wrong one. I do not have any specific opinions about what alternative name or extension or whatever should be used, as long as it does not have that problem | 16:52:11 |
| elikoga | And since it's a strict subset, I don't see a problem | 16:52:19 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | * I am not proposing one; I am complaining that the current choice (of making it look like it's "just a Nix file") was the wrong one. I do not have any specific opinions about what alternative name or extension or whatever should be used, as long as it does not have that problem | 16:52:19 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | because this introduces an additional footgun and we already have more than enough of thosed | 16:52:29 |
| elikoga | I expect .nix files to contain nix. A condition that is fulfilled with flake.nix files | 16:52:34 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | * because this introduces an additional footgun and we already have more than enough of those | 16:52:34 |
| elikoga | I don't expect arbitrary files to contain arbitrary values it's not like you have this compaint about NixOS Modules | 16:53:01 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | it means that you cannot expect either a) your usual code organization techniques or b) your existing code snippets to work as-is in a flake.nix because there is a subset of valid Nix that is invalid in a flake.nix | 16:53:22 |
| elikoga | ? | 16:53:50 |
| elikoga | There is an obivous freeform value place where you can write all the nix you want | 16:54:23 |
| elikoga | * There is an obvious freeform value place where you can write all the nix you want | 16:54:30 |
