| 6 Jul 2021 |
 manveru | has anyone managed to do nix flake build offline within a nixos test? | 10:06:47 |
|  nurelin joined the room. | 11:42:15 |
|  spacesbot - keeps a log of public NixOS channels changed their display name from spacesbot to spacesbot - keeps a log of public NixOS channels. | 22:11:38 |
| 7 Jul 2021 |
| *  Krey created https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/129502
help wanted | 06:22:56 |
 pamplemousse | I very recently came accross https://github.com/NixOS/nix/pull/3160, and it seems that it would critically simplify my struggle to build fuzz targets (binaries - and their required libs - with different instrumentation)!
(As briefly mentioned here: https://discourse.nixos.org/t/tweag-fellowship-fuzzing-nix-1/13904#integration-with-the-existing-build-process-11 , I am trying to do this using the make mechanics already present, and no solution I have so far are both working and self-sufficient - does not require to run a script to work - let alone being elegant...)
Does it still have some support, interest? | 22:15:01 |
| 8 Jul 2021 |
 Las | Is Nickel in the future going to replace Nix somehow? I was wondering about using Rust in Nix, but remembered that Nickel is written in Rust, but Nickel doesn't seem to be compatible with Nix syntax. | 15:03:35 |
| pamplemousse | In reply to @Las:matrix.org
Is Nickel in the future going to replace Nix somehow? I was wondering about using Rust in Nix, but remembered that Nickel is written in Rust, but Nickel doesn't seem to be compatible with Nix syntax. Seems like it.
Nickel is an evolution of the Nix language, while trying to overcome some of its limitations.
https://github.com/tweag/nickel#use-cases
Dunno when (or even how) the transition will happen though ^^
| 16:21:28 |
| Las | That's what I'm wondering because it's incompatible with Nix synax | 16:21:51 |
| Las | * That's what I'm wondering because it's incompatible with Nix syntax | 16:21:53 |
 balsoft | I hope not :/ | 16:21:53 |
| Las | Why? | 16:21:58 |
| balsoft | It's not compatible with Nix, so instead of a switch it would be like a total rewrite of everything. | 16:22:52 |
| Las | How so? | 16:23:06 |
| Las | Other than the surface syntax differences? | 16:23:16 |
| balsoft | "The surface syntax differences" mean that you have to rewrite all of nixpkgs. | 16:23:32 |
| pamplemousse | In reply to @balsoft:balsoft.ru
It's not compatible with Nix, so instead of a switch it would be like a total rewrite of everything. Not necessarily, there could be tools developped to transpile from Nix to Nickel. | 16:23:37 |
| balsoft | In reply to @pamplemouss_:matrix.org
Not necessarily, there could be tools developped to transpile from Nix to Nickel. In that case we shall be stuck in a limbo with the disadvantages of both languages until we finish the idiomatic rewrite (which will likely never happen) | 16:24:10 |
| Las | In reply to @balsoft:balsoft.ru
"The surface syntax differences" mean that you have to rewrite all of nixpkgs. That's what I'm wondering about though | 16:24:14 |
| Las | I was wondering if they're going to perhaps add some compatibility mode | 16:24:21 |
| Las | E.g. parse .nix files with the old Nix syntax | 16:24:30 |
| balsoft | Looking at how painfully the introduction of flakes is going (and they are a great feature, with many advantages, and almost trivially compatible with pre-flake nix) the community may not survive something as massive as a switch to another language entirely. | 16:25:48 |
| Las | I get that | 16:26:33 |
| Las | I wonder why they didn't just make Nickel Nix with types | 16:26:39 |
| Las | Instead of making it Almost Nix with types | 16:26:47 |
| balsoft | They tried | 16:26:46 |
| balsoft | The initiative died | 16:26:51 |
| Las | How come? | 16:26:56 |
| balsoft | https://www.tweag.io/blog/2017-05-23-typing-nix/ | 16:27:02 |
| balsoft | https://github.com/NixOS/nix/issues/3042#issuecomment-521188864 | 16:27:33 |
| Las | Thanks | 16:27:48 |
