| 5 Jul 2021 |
 fufexan | I believe so | 20:15:36 |
 David Arnold (blaggacao) | * Would a code branch help that asserts for `self.overlays` being different from `{}`? | 20:15:40 |
| fufexan | well maybe not really, since it says value is a function, not a set | 20:16:02 |
| fufexan | * well maybe not really, since it says value is a function while a set was expected | 20:16:14 |
| David Arnold (blaggacao) | That's the error that puzzles me. | 20:16:18 |
| fufexan | couldn't it also accept self.overlay? | 20:17:03 |
| fufexan | * couldn't it also accept self.overlay? with a bit of work | 20:17:25 |
| fufexan | I'll look into it tomorrow since I know you're busy fellows | 20:17:38 |
| fufexan | thanks for helping me debug this :D | 20:17:49 |
| David Arnold (blaggacao) | I wonder where the function comes from... | 20:18:25 |
| David Arnold (blaggacao) | nix-repl> builtins.attrValues {}
[ ]
| 20:18:33 |
| David Arnold (blaggacao) | (being {} doesn't seem t be a particular problem) | 20:18:48 |
| David Arnold (blaggacao) | must be a toxic output of internalOverlays, I'd say | 20:19:19 |
| David Arnold (blaggacao) | (_: v: [ v.overlay or (_: _: { }) ] ++ attrValues v.overlays or { }) | 20:23:13 |
| David Arnold (blaggacao) | vs: (_: v: [ v.overlay or (_: _: { }) ] ++ attrValues (v.overlays or { })) ? | 20:23:27 |
| David Arnold (blaggacao) | * vs:
(_: v: [ v.overlay or (_: _: { }) ] ++ attrValues (v.overlays or { })) ? | 20:24:00 |
| David Arnold (blaggacao) | Don't remember if this precedence rule is implicit.. | 20:24:39 |
| David Arnold (blaggacao) | fufexan: Can you push the failing state to a branch so I can try to reproduce? | 20:39:36 |
| David Arnold (blaggacao) | I don't want to 🤷 because this is goging to pop up again, eventually. | 20:39:54 |
| David Arnold (blaggacao) | * I don't want to 🤷 because this is going to pop up again, eventually. | 20:41:02 |
| fufexan | hmm, let me try getting it to fail again | 20:43:31 |
