You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Thinking about the current implementation of wrapper-manager, maybe it is better to have one lib.evalModules per wrapper, instead of a single one (like the current implementation).
The problems it would solve:
Threading one wrapper to another (for example, wrapper B includes A, which is also a wrapper) This can be done with config., nevermind
Easily create wrappers for one-off things, like programs.<name>.package options from NixOS.
What it could make easier:
Integration with the splicing of nixpkgs (to allow for cross-compilation etc)
(But perhaps can be done with the current impl)
As for the negatives:
Maybe a negative performance impact, in cpu cycles or memory (to be measured)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I think the best way is to have the current API as is but also provide a convenience function which evals a single wrapper type and returns the wrapped package
Thinking about the current implementation of wrapper-manager, maybe it is better to have one
lib.evalModules
per wrapper, instead of a single one (like the current implementation).The problems it would solve:
Threading one wrapper to another (for example, wrapper B includes A, which is also a wrapper)This can be done withconfig.
, nevermindprograms.<name>.package
options from NixOS.What it could make easier:
(But perhaps can be done with the current impl)
As for the negatives:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: