Comment by nothrabannosir

Comment by nothrabannosir 3 days ago

5 replies

View on Hacker News

I don’t understand—the language itself is completely contained and separate from the derivation. Evaluation could be done in any language and the derivation will remain the output. You can absolutely have a better language generate derivations, surely? Hell, you could use Python typescript or go if you wanted to. They’d even be completely compatible with the unholy mess of cursed bash that is stdenv.

What you can’t port over to another language as neatly are the modules. Good riddance, id say. Undebuggable spaghetti from hell.

> from the inside, there's not much of a desire to switch to something better, because the language isn't the thing that gives people trouble after the initial learning period (which would exist with any host language).

Unfortunately I have wasted enough of my life to call myself “on the inside” and IMHO the language itself is close to the number one threat to wider adoption of nix.

tomn 3 days ago

> You can absolutely have a better language generate derivations, surely?

Yes, hence guix. The issue is that it doesn't fit well into a pure functional language like haskell if you want to allow import-from-derivation or basic functions like "readFile", without putting everything in IO (complicating the DSL).

https://nix.dev/manual/nix/2.25/language/import-from-derivat...

What you can’t port over to another language as neatly are the modules. Good riddance, id say. Undebuggable spaghetti from hell.

Not that it matters, but why not? Modules are written in the pure-functional bit of nix, so could be expressed in practically any language.

>> from the inside, there's not much of a desire to switch to something better, because the language isn't the thing that gives people trouble after the initial learning period (which would exist with any host language).

> Unfortunately I have wasted enough of my life to call myself “on the inside” and IMHO the language itself is close to the number one threat to wider adoption of nix.

I guess different people have different experiences. This was mainly based on my personal experience, but if you look through the help section on discourse, the questions are not about the language (at the time of writing i didn’t find even one in the first few pages):

https://discourse.nixos.org/c/learn/9

There also just doesn't seen to be a big push in the nix community to replace the language. Nickel exists, but i don't see the push for that from the nix side.

Reply View 4 replies
  • kstenerud 3 days ago

    > but if you look through the help section on discourse, the questions are not about the language

    Mostly because people don't know how to ask questions about the language. That was my experience.

    Over the past decade I've made a few forays into Nix and NixOS (I still need to revert one of my servers back to Debian from NixOS). Inevitably I find the language obtuse, and the help online is always in the form of code fragments whose purpose kinda sorta looks alright maybe, but doesn't ever seem to fit into the setup I've built. So then I'm faced with completely rearranging the structure to match the helpful code, or try to massage the helpful code into my structure (which may or may not be a monstrosity, nor could I explain what every one of the magical incantations are for). Rinse and repeat with the next problem.

    So it becomes essentially impossible to ask questions about it because I don't actually know where one thing ends and another begins.

    After awhile, I start asking myself "Why was this a worthwhile venture again?"

    I've heard good things about guix though. Might give that a try next. I'm done with Nix - burned one time too many.

    Reply View 2 replies
    • tomn 3 days ago

      > the help online is always in the form of code fragments whose purpose kinda sorta looks alright maybe, but doesn't ever seem to fit into the setup I've built. So then I'm faced with completely rearranging the structure to match the helpful code, or try to massage the helpful code into my structure (which may or may not be a monstrosity, nor could I explain what every one of the magical incantations are for)

      None of these are language problems, they are problems with the way nixpkgs is structured and the ways nix is used (or your understanding of those).

      Perhaps being purely functional causes some of this complexity/unfamiliarity, but in that case replacing it with another pure functional language (the original point i was replying to) is not going to help. Maybe replacing it with scheme (functional/imperative) does, I don't know.

      Reply View 1 reply
      • nothrabannosir 3 days ago

        The semantics of the language make it virtually impossible to write a good lsp with “go to definition”, particularly when you get into the module system (which is where you need it most). This is a massive barrier to entry and the only way to solve it is to spend a lot of time imbibing nix lore. It’s a fundamentally unsustainable language design for adoption as an incidental build tool and it’s no surprise that those who manage to persist are also the ones who spend a lot of time with it. Unlike a more ergonomic language with good tooling and semantics which encourage adoption by casual users.

        Reply View 0 replies
  • nothrabannosir 3 days ago

    Discourse is massive selection bias. The people who make it that far are not an accurate representation of the potential nix users.

    Reply View 0 replies