[chef-dev] Re: Re: 12.4 DSL in core providers

[Noah Kantrowitz < >]

On Jun 29, 2015, at 3:26 PM, Daniel DeLeo 
<
 >
 wrote:

> On Saturday, June 27, 2015 at 12:57 PM, Lamont Granquist wrote:
>> On 6/26/15 4:21 PM, Noah Kantrowitz wrote:
>>> Throwing this on the mailing list as a reminder since I think I've used 
>>> up my quota of tickets lately: It would be nice to move towards adding 
>>> the recipe DSL back to Chef::Provider. Currently there are unpleasant 
>>> issues when you subclass a non-DSL-using provider and then mix in the DSL 
>>> module. Several providers have methods with names matching DSL stuffs, 
>>> (https://github.com/chef/chef/blob/master/lib/chef/provider/git.rb#L324, ;
>>> https://github.com/chef/chef/blob/master/lib/chef/provider/execute.rb#L30)
>>>  so if you mix in the DSL such that it comes before the superclass in the 
>>> MRO, stuff goes haywire. If the DSL was pulled in earlier in the MRO, 
>>> then the "correct" methods would take priority. I can fix this one-off 
>>> each time it comes up, but being unable to use the DSL when extending 
>>> core classes is something I would love to see in the future (ex. 
>>> https://github.com/poise/application_git/blob/master/lib/poise_application_git/resource.rb
>>>  and 
>>> https://github.com/poise/poise-ruby/blob/master/lib/poise_ruby/resources/ruby_execute.rb).
>>> 
>>> --Noah
>> Yeah, in retrospect we shouldn't have pulled the Recipe DSL and should  
>> have eliminated method_missing from the Recipe DSL instead. Since we're  
>> going down the road of eliminating method_missing from the Recipe DSL,  
>> it should probably go back into Chef::Provider.
> 
> I find having the DSL when I don’t want it pretty annoying actually. 
> method_missing is really annoying since you get absurd errors for any 
> typo’d method name, but the DSL also camps on a lot of domain words so you 
> can also invoke it “correctly” on accident as well.
> 
> Is there a compromise that doesn’t suck, like invoking the DSL only inside 
> a block or adding just the non-dynamic DSL methods (#declare_resource and 
> #build_resource) maybe?

method_missing is being phased out already and will be gone from the DSL in 
13. We could certainly put it back in Provider without method_missing too, 
since we already burned that compat bridge. Doing in a block is possible (see 
also the fused #action context stuff in resources already), but I think it 
would be cleaner to find a solution that keeps "real providers" and LWRPs in 
parity.

--Noah

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail