<{^_^}>
nix#2998 (by deliciouslytyped, 3 weeks ago, open): Named ellipses
<infinisil>
i think
<infinisil>
Wait no
<infinisil>
Distantly relevant
<manveru>
hehe
<manveru>
because attrsets aren't difficult enough yet :P
<infinisil>
Hm, I guess that @args doesn't have the defaults makes sense when you look at how nix works
<infinisil>
Because @args is then just the thunk that gets passed in
<manveru>
yeah
<manveru>
so i don't think changing the behaviour is possible without major compatibility issues
<infinisil>
And performance issues too maybe
<manveru>
but one can dream :)
<manveru>
anyway, the v2 of my site generator is pretty much ready
<manveru>
just need to choose a name... SageNix is kinda weird
* manveru
goes looking up obscure greek myths
<infinisil>
I've been thinking about writing a nix specification, where all weird things get removed
<infinisil>
Hehe neat
<infinisil>
This specification could then be the nix core language, and different nix evaluators could then implement different extensions (where the current nix would have a bunch of extensions already)
<infinisil>
And code can specify it needs some extensions to evaluate
<manveru>
uh... that does sound like haskell :9
<manveru>
not sure i've seen that in any other languages... maybe rust?
<manveru>
anw, i'll call this thing Eupheme
<manveru>
or maybe EupheNix
colemickens has quit [Write error: Connection reset by peer]
colemickens has joined #nix-lang
{^_^} has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
{^_^} has joined #nix-lang
ddellacosta has joined #nix-lang
<manveru>
hm, using `assert` in nix repl pretty much breaks it
__monty__ has quit [Quit: leaving]
<ekleog>
hm? `assert false; 1+1` works pretty well for me
<manveru>
type just `assert` :)
<ekleog>
it's just the repl waiting for more input to complete the expression
<ekleog>
if you type assert\nfalse; 1+1 it works
<manveru>
yeah
<manveru>
was my first time trying assert, didn't know how it works :)
<ekleog>
oh 'k :)
<manveru>
seems like it's similar to `with`
<ekleog>
yup, with and assert have a weird syntax, but I guess it makes sense when trying to do pseudo-statements in an expression-based language
<manveru>
yeah
<ekleog>
ooh makes me think
<ekleog>
when I wanted $ for nix, nix already has ;
<ekleog>
the ; of assert is exactly the semantics I'd like $ to have for everything, if we consider assert as a function bool -> 'a -> 'a