Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Rewrite meta-check.nix type checking logic. #37252

Closed
wants to merge 14 commits into from

Conversation

Profpatsch
Copy link
Member

@Profpatsch Profpatsch commented Mar 17, 2018

Description of the main commit:

stdenv/generic/check-meta: rewrite type checking code  …
The previous code used some ad-hoc attribute enumeration to check for missing
fields and did not really type check the attributes, because it used `t.check`
from the module system types, which only does shallow checks for nested types,
e.g. just `builtins.isList` for (listOf strings).

This new version uses `types-simple` to recursively check every attribute,
outputting accurate information for type errors in nested fields, e.g.:

Package ‘hello-2.10’ in … has an invalid meta attrset:
maintainers.1.email should be: string
but is: null

When we set
meta.maintainers [ eelco foobar ];
in `hello/default.nix` and foobar is defined as
{ name = "foobar"; email = null; };
in `maintainers-list.nix`.

The path accurately pins down where the type check failed:
In the `maintainers` field, the second element of the list (counting from 0)
and the field email in that element.

Further work: If an unsupported meta field is used, the type error will print
the complete type of the meta product, which is quite big. The type error should
show a diff of the problematic fields in that case.
This is possible but not yet integrated into the type checking logic.

Please go trough the commits one-by-one, since they all add some pretty different changes and are built on each other as single units.
Adding the type library might be a bit controversial, but I hope I have provided enough incentive in the docstrings and the commit messages to persuade you that it is a good addition.

Meta can be checked with this invocation from the ofborg readme.

@Profpatsch
Copy link
Member Author

Okay, with the latest commit I recommend looking at lib/types-simple.nix in the overview, since it should be a lot easier to understand with these comments.

@GrahamcOfBorg GrahamcOfBorg added 10.rebuild-darwin: 0 This PR does not cause any packages to rebuild on Darwin 10.rebuild-linux: 0 This PR does not cause any packages to rebuild on Linux labels Mar 17, 2018
Copy link
Member

@aszlig aszlig left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Great work on the type system, although I'm not quite sure whether this is a good idea to use for checking meta, because we already have to fight against eval time.

Apart from that, it could also make sense to replace the type checking for the NixOS module system to use this instead (as it avoids the need to use tryEval for checking) on everything but submodules, maybe @nbp could chime in for that as well.

Other than that, I think adding another type system needs to have more eyes on this, so I'd suggest adding this as a separate pull request.

# and it returns a more or less pretty string of errors.
prettyPrintErrors =
let
join = lib.foldl lib.concat [];
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why not concatLists (which is a primop)?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good catch, will change.

checkMeta = meta: if shouldCheckMeta then lib.remove null (lib.mapAttrsToList checkMetaAttr meta) else [];
checkMeta = meta:
if shouldCheckMeta
then lib.types-simple.checkType metaType meta
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Did you actually measure the evaluation time overhead this has?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nope, how would I measure it? Maybe cc @grahamc.

Right now the checks are not enabled by default, of course that would be a final goal.


## -- HELPERS --

unimplemented = abort "unimplemented";
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is not used anywhere, maybe remove?


## -- TYPES --

# the type with no inhabitants (kind of useless …)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

So why have it in the first place?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ah, it’s used in the tests for example: (list void) is a type with exactly one inhabitant, []. One wouldn’t believe it, but void is a pretty handy type to have (the description is a bit tongue-in-cheek).

};

# the type with exactly one inhabitant
unit = mkScalar {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why do we need this type?

Copy link
Member Author

@Profpatsch Profpatsch Mar 18, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Similar to void this doesn’t seem useful at first, but it’s even more elementar than bool in a sense; e.g. the void you find in languages like C(++) is really a unit.

A great use-case is for sum types:

let mode = sum { off = unit; level = int; };
in checkType mode { off = {}; }

which corresponds to the Haskell type:

data Mode = Off | Level Int

# list (attrs unit):
# [ { a = {}; } { b = {}; } ]
# []
list = t: mkRecursive {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Maybe call this listOf so we use the same naming as with NixOS modules.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I deliberately changed the names to be internally consistent; the module system has string and str, because string did strange concatenation. listOf and attrsOf have the same history with attrs and list, which are not able to recursively check their contents.

Compare the correspondence table below.

# attrs (attrs string):
# { foo.bar = "hello"; baz.quux = "x"; }
# { x = { y = "wow"; }; }
attrs = t: mkRecursive {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Same here: attrsOf

optfs = builtins.attrNames opt;
vfs = builtins.attrNames v;
in builtins.isAttrs v &&
(if opt == {}
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'd use intersectAttrs (especially because it's a primop) here instead of converting to list and use subtractLists.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

To check for then reqfs == vfs in the line below, I’d have to use builtins.intersectAttrs v req == req, which has to do a deep equality check for req (or v if I turn the arguments around).

# or even recursiveUpdate if you want to be naughty.
# Hint: It’s probably better to use `productOpt` instead,
# but more power to the people.
defaults = t:
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hm, I don't think this has any more benefit to having to specify the defaults directly, especially if it comes to code readability. You need to look up the default here instead of just following the code you're already looking at.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I implemented that as a crutch for optional fields originally, but productOpt kind of replaced it pretty quickly. It might make sense to remove it again, yes.

@Profpatsch
Copy link
Member Author

Profpatsch commented Mar 18, 2018

Here’s a (non-exhaustive) correspondence table.

module types types-simple
string n/a
str string
attrs attrs any
list list any
attrsOf attrs
listOf list
either l r union [ l r ]
loaOf t union [ (list t) (attrs t) ]
nullOr n/a
submodule ~ product/productOpt
enum can be trivially built with restrict
ints.between can be trivially built with restrict
n/a sum
addCheck (no description update) restrict

Some of the module types come from the fact that they also contain merging logic and submodule logic, which complicates the base design and lead to the deprecation of some types.

@GrahamcOfBorg GrahamcOfBorg added the 2.status: merge conflict This PR has merge conflicts with the target branch label Mar 19, 2018
A simple type system to check plain nix values.
Please see the module comments for further explanations.

Will be used to correct the buggy meta-field checks and help in sanity-checking
other parts of nixpkgs.
productOpt: a product type with the possibility for optional fields
defaults: generate (semi-arbitrary) default values for a given type

In preparation for the rewrite of `check-meta.nix`.
The previous code used some ad-hoc attribute enumeration to check for missing
fields and did not really type check the attributes, because it used `t.check`
from the module system types, which only does shallow checks for nested types,
e.g. just `builtins.isList` for (listOf strings).

This new version uses `types-simple` to recursively check every attribute,
outputting accurate information for type errors in nested fields, e.g.:

Package ‘hello-2.10’ in … has an invalid meta attrset:
maintainers.1.email should be: string
but is: null

When we set
meta.maintainers [ eelco foobar ];
in `hello/default.nix` and foobar is defined as
{ name = "foobar"; email = null; };
in `maintainers-list.nix`.

The path accurately pins down where the type check failed:
In the `maintainers` field, the second element of the list (counting from 0)
and the field email in that element.

Further work: If an unsupported meta field is used, the type error will print
the complete type of the meta product, which is quite big. The type error should
show a diff of the problematic fields in that case.
This is possible but not yet integrated into the type checking logic.
The meta type is changed to either a string, a license or a list of licenses,
where license is an attrset with required `fullName`, `shortName` and `free`
fields, and two optional fields.

Every package that does not conform to this union type is fixed; I noticed that
only a few packages used `list of strings`, so I corrected them and removed the
alternative.
Especially document the inner workings of the `checkType` function.
`defaults` originally only was a crutch to make products accept optional
attributes shallowly, but that has been replaced by `productOpt`, so we don’t
need it anymore.

Also a few other changes based on input by @aszlig.
@Profpatsch
Copy link
Member Author

Okay, rebase onto current master after the changes in check-meta.nix.

@Ericson2314 I noticed you create a lot of types in lib/system/parse.nix. I think changing the checks to lib.types-simple from this pull request would improve the type errors as well as how concise these types work (after adding an enum type). For now I’ve stubbed the meta.platforms fields out with any.

@GrahamcOfBorg GrahamcOfBorg removed the 2.status: merge conflict This PR has merge conflicts with the target branch label Mar 19, 2018
# TODO: use the types from lib/systems/parse.nix
# any should be lib.systems.parsed.types.system
system = any;
platform = union [ string any ];
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@Ericson2314 This is where I stub out the platform types at the moment.

`restrict` is able to restrict the inhabitants of a type, meaning only a subset
of a type is allowed, the new type is “smaller”, but still gives nice type
errors if a nested value has the wrong type.

See the tests for some usage examples.
@Profpatsch
Copy link
Member Author

Update: enum and other restricted types are now possible using restrict.

@@ -31,6 +31,9 @@ let
options = callLibs ./options.nix;
types = callLibs ./types.nix;

# type checking plain nix values
types-simple = callLibs ./types-simple.nix;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please use camelCase for attribute names.

@edolstra
Copy link
Member

What is the memory / evaluation time impact of this?

};


# -- Products --
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What are "products"? Seems like a pretty strange terminology.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

types-simple is essentially defining algebraic data types, like ML or Haskell have; "products" is the standard terminology for tuple- or record-like things in this setting.

@oxij
Copy link
Member

oxij commented Apr 18, 2018 via email

@Profpatsch
Copy link
Member Author

Profpatsch commented Apr 18, 2018

I planned to make bool into a non-mergable bool and split other uses into types.any and types.all since bool has two different monoids.

Ah, the Monoid remark is enlightening, yes. Merging is really just <> (the binary operator) and defaults are mempty, (the one-element). Awesome!

@oxij
Copy link
Member

oxij commented Apr 24, 2018

ping! Progress? Do you have an updated/rebased version of this to play with?

@Profpatsch
Copy link
Member Author

Profpatsch commented Apr 25, 2018

@oxij I have just pushed a branch which does away with the in-file changes of check-meta.nix and gives you a type that can check derivation & meta fields: Profpatsch@7a2caa0

I intend to commit all improvements to that branch (types-simple-standalone) first.

`names` was originally intended to be able to match on the specific instance of
a type, but it breaks the abstraction in a way.
Since the function that used it was removed, we can remove the name attributes
as well.
@oxij
Copy link
Member

oxij commented Apr 26, 2018

@Profpatsch awesome, thanks!

@Nadrieril
Copy link
Member

Wow, this is great work ! I really like having the typeckecking logic separate from the merging logic. Is there a plan to make nixos types use this for typechecking under the hood ?

@Shados
Copy link
Member

Shados commented Dec 13, 2018

@Profpatsch this is perhaps somewhat off-topic, but I read through types-simple.nix, and I found it rather tricky to understand the actual type checking code. Primarily, pulling the recursion out of checkType and into cata and fmap made the control flow egregiously difficult for me to follow, and fmap effectively changing the semantics of the nested types in-place was unexpected. In order to understand it, I ended up having to write a version of it wihout either of those.

From the context, I gather that the design is based on ideas from category theory, and would (I assume) be easily comprehensible to people familiar with it. As a result, I am curious: are there other benefits in this specific instance to keeping the implementation so close to the abstract design?

Those comments notwithstanding, I still found it easier to understand than the existing module type system, and having a self-contained type system in place would be very useful.

@Profpatsch
Copy link
Member Author

From the context, I gather that the design is based on ideas from category theory

No, not really, it’s from the classic bananas & barbed wire paper. You can find an explanation here: http://reasonablypolymorphic.com/blog/recursion-schemes/
It helps greatly when dealing with recursive data structures, by splitting open their recursion and just looking at one layer at a time.
You are right that it superficially complicates the code in an untyped setting, but in practice it is a great fit for a type checker which is intended to be expanded by users. If I expose the alg definition in checkType (which I should totally do), users can chain new transformations to each layer of recursion, e.g. to change error messages according to their needs.

oxij added a commit to oxij/nixpkgs that referenced this pull request Mar 9, 2019
…g` of NixOS to it

This types `nixpkgs.config` of NixOS with `types.opaque` type and applies the
resulting evaluated value to the newly introduced `configs` argument of `pkgs`.

The new `configs` argument is like the old `config` argument (still available for
convenience) but a list.

This design was chosen because we can't just make a submodule out of
`pkgs/top-level/config.nix` in NixOS because

- firstly, we would have to duplicate all the magic `pkgs/top-level/default.nix`
  does to `config` in NixOS,

- secondly, in principle, we might not have all the arguments needed by
  `pkgs/top-level/config.nix` in NixOS because some of them can be
  computed internally by `pkgs` (this is not a problem now
  but it will be a problem in use-flags patchset that comes after), thus all
  of those computations will need to be duplicated too,

- thirdly, doing it this way keeps NixOS and pkgs separated, so that, in
  principle, one could replace NixOS with an alternative thing without duplicating
  all of the above once again and/or one could use separate module and type
  systems between NixOS and pkgs (`types.opaque` is trivial to
  implement in any type system and pkgs can use "types-simple" of NixOS#37252 today,
  if we were to wish it so).

Note that since this design removes the need to do any preprocessing of
`nixpkgs.config` in NixOS all the ad-hoc merging code was removed. Yay!
oxij added a commit to oxij/nixpkgs that referenced this pull request Mar 13, 2019
…g` of NixOS to it

This types `nixpkgs.config` of NixOS with `types.opaque` type and applies the
resulting evaluated value to the newly introduced `configs` argument of `pkgs`.

The new `configs` argument is like the old `config` argument (still available for
convenience) but a list.

This design was chosen because we can't just make a submodule out of
`pkgs/top-level/config.nix` in NixOS because

- firstly, we would have to duplicate all the magic `pkgs/top-level/default.nix`
  does to `config` in NixOS,

- secondly, in principle, we might not have all the arguments needed by
  `pkgs/top-level/config.nix` in NixOS because some of them can be
  computed internally by `pkgs` (this is not a problem now
  but it will be a problem in use-flags patchset that comes after), thus all
  of those computations will need to be duplicated too,

- thirdly, doing it this way keeps NixOS and pkgs separated, so that, in
  principle, one could replace NixOS with an alternative thing without duplicating
  all of the above once again and/or one could use separate module and type
  systems between NixOS and pkgs (`types.opaque` is trivial to
  implement in any type system and pkgs can use "types-simple" of NixOS#37252 today,
  if we were to wish it so).

Note that since this design removes the need to do any preprocessing of
`nixpkgs.config` in NixOS all the ad-hoc merging code was removed. Yay!
@mmahut
Copy link
Member

mmahut commented Aug 12, 2019

Are there any updates on this pull request, please?

@Profpatsch
Copy link
Member Author

Are there any updates on this pull request, please?

I still think it’s valuable, but I don’t know of any way out of the “we don’t want two type systems in nixpkgs” issue.

@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Jun 1, 2020

Thank you for your contributions.
This has been automatically marked as stale because it has had no activity for 180 days.
If this is still important to you, we ask that you leave a comment below. Your comment can be as simple as "still important to me". This lets people see that at least one person still cares about this. Someone will have to do this at most twice a year if there is no other activity.
Here are suggestions that might help resolve this more quickly:

  1. Search for maintainers and people that previously touched the
    related code and @ mention them in a comment.
  2. Ask on the NixOS Discourse. 3. Ask on the #nixos channel on
    irc.freenode.net.

@stale stale bot added the 2.status: stale https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/.github/STALE-BOT.md label Jun 1, 2020
@Profpatsch Profpatsch closed this Jun 9, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
2.status: merge conflict This PR has merge conflicts with the target branch 2.status: stale https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/.github/STALE-BOT.md 6.topic: python 6.topic: stdenv Standard environment 10.rebuild-darwin: 0 This PR does not cause any packages to rebuild on Darwin 10.rebuild-linux: 0 This PR does not cause any packages to rebuild on Linux
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.