Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The OpenTF Manifesto

opentf.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 392 posts

Re: The OpenTF Manifesto

#291

Post by verdverm »

lmm wrote: post #290
AaronFriel wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pulumi has a few languages other than YAML and Pulumi is declarative[1], and the programs you write are only as complex as you want them to be. This python program declares an S3 bucket and declares ten objects to exist in it. from pulumi_aws import s3 bucket = s3.Bucket('bucket') for i in range(10): s3.BucketObject( f'object-{i}', s3.BucketObjectArgs( bucket=bucket.id, key=str(i), ) ) Even so, Pulumi YAML has a "com…

An imperative for loop is somehow declarative now? Lol.

you can have loops and still be declarative, CUE has loops, though they are considered comprehensions more technically, but there is no assignment or stack in CUE

One of the interesting aspects of CUE is that it gives us many of the programming constructs we are used to, but remains Turing incomplete, so no general recursion or user defined functions. There is a scripting layer where you can get more real world stuff done too

The CUE language is super interesting, has a very unique take on things and comes from the same heritage as Go, containers, and Kubernetes

https://cuelang.org | https://cuetorials.com

Re: The OpenTF Manifesto

#292

Post by jjnoakes »

lmm wrote: post #290
AaronFriel wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pulumi has a few languages other than YAML and Pulumi is declarative[1], and the programs you write are only as complex as you want them to be. This python program declares an S3 bucket and declares ten objects to exist in it. from pulumi_aws import s3 bucket = s3.Bucket('bucket') for i in range(10): s3.BucketObject( f'object-{i}', s3.BucketObjectArgs( bucket=bucket.id, key=str(i), ) ) Even so, Pulumi YAML has a "com…

An imperative for loop is somehow declarative now? Lol.

This seems extremely dismissive and shallow.

The imperative part of that code appears to be analogous to templating. The actual work done under the covers is not imperative, but is based on the difference between the result of the template execution and the current state of the system. That's what makes it declarative.

Re: The OpenTF Manifesto

#293

Post by orochimaaru »

new23d wrote: post #175

As an end-user, not competing with HashiCorp, this change doesn't worry me. According to their FAQ [1]: 10. What are the usage limitations for HashiCorp’s products under BSL? All non-production uses are permitted. All production uses are allowed other than hosting or embedding the software in an offering competitive with HashiCorp commercial products, hosted or self-managed. 24. Can I host the HashiCorp products as a…

It won't affect you unless you're selling tooling that embeds TF in some form. That, unfortunately, covers too wide a space and there is no telling when your offering is going to be in competition with Hashi's.

Re: The OpenTF Manifesto

#294

Post by WaterSponge »

What if Microsoft buys it for there devtools business like NPM, Github, VSCode + Terraform,Consul,Vault.. all just more gateways into azure but like all the others they own allow you to use it how you want opensource.

Re: The OpenTF Manifesto

#295

Post by linuxdude314 »

time0ut wrote: post #149

As a long time Gruntwork customer, contributor, and fan, it is really nice to see them stepping up as thought leaders here. They run a great open source community already. Our DevOps team has been buzzing all day with what we are going to do. For now, we are staying pinned to the last open source version of Terraform and will likely follow Gruntwork's lead when the time comes.

If your company isn't building a product based on terraform, why are you doing anything?

Re: The OpenTF Manifesto

#296

Post by verdverm »

jjnoakes wrote: post #292
lmm wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An imperative for loop is somehow declarative now? Lol.

This seems extremely dismissive and shallow. The imperative part of that code appears to be analogous to templating. The actual work done under the covers is not imperative, but is based on the difference between the result of the template execution and the current state of the system. That's what makes it declarative.

It really depends on the interaction between the user's Pulumi script and the Pulumi engine.

If there is more than one back and forth, you become declarative, even if you imperatively generate a "declarative" intermediate representation (not really sure what state file at a point in time could ever be imperative), you then would get back some data from the engine, then make choices about what to send off to the engine in the next request.

It's important to understand that with Pulumi, you can end up in either situation. You have to be careful to not become imperative overall is probably the better way to consider this.

https://www.pulumi.com/docs/languages-sdks/javascript/#entry...

Another way this can break down is if the user writes code to call the same APIs in the middle of a Pulumi script. I meant to try this myself to verify it works, but I would assume that Pulumi is not stopping me from doing something like this.

Re: The OpenTF Manifesto

#297

Post by jjnoakes »

verdverm wrote: post #296
jjnoakes wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems extremely dismissive and shallow. The imperative part of that code appears to be analogous to templating. The actual work done under the covers is not imperative, but is based on the difference between the result of the template execution and the current state of the system. That's what makes it declarative.

It really depends on the interaction between the user's Pulumi script and the Pulumi engine. If there is more than one back and forth, you become declarative, even if you imperatively generate a "declarative" intermediate representation (not really sure what state file at a point in time could ever be imperative), you then would get back some data from the engine, then make choices about what to send off to the engin…

In general maybe, but in the specific context above, I think calling that loop declarative is accurate, and laughing at that classification is a poor response rooted in a deep misunderstanding.

Re: The OpenTF Manifesto

#298

Post by lmm »

jjnoakes wrote: post #292
lmm wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An imperative for loop is somehow declarative now? Lol.

This seems extremely dismissive and shallow. The imperative part of that code appears to be analogous to templating. The actual work done under the covers is not imperative, but is based on the difference between the result of the template execution and the current state of the system. That's what makes it declarative.

> This seems extremely dismissive and shallow.

When someone tries to make a sophisticated argument that up is down and white is black, dismissive and shallow is the right response.

> The actual work done under the covers is not imperative

Having a declarative layer somewhere in the stack doesn't make something declarative, if that's not the layer you actually use to work on and reason about the system. See the famous "the C language is purely functional" post.

Re: The OpenTF Manifesto

#299

Post by verdverm »

jjnoakes wrote: post #297
verdverm wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really depends on the interaction between the user's Pulumi script and the Pulumi engine. If there is more than one back and forth, you become declarative, even if you imperatively generate a "declarative" intermediate representation (not really sure what state file at a point in time could ever be imperative), you then would get back some data from the engine, then make choices about what to send off to the engin…

In general maybe, but in the specific context above, I think calling that loop declarative is accurate, and laughing at that classification is a poor response rooted in a deep misunderstanding.

I was just wondering what stops me from reading and writing to a cloud bucket like an infinite tape?

https://www.pulumi.com/registry/packages/gcp/api-docs/storag...

Post reply on HN