I inverted the logic for complex setups and forgot to handle the zero
cases. I also didn't notice my loop continue error. This cleans all this
up so that we can have proper exported resource matching.
I think this is what I want in most scenarios, is there a reason to do
otherwise? This is because we may wish to export incomplete resources,
where the remaining necessary fields for validation happens on collect.
Initially I wasn't 100% clear or decided on the send/recv semantics.
After some experimenting, I think this is much closer to what we want.
Nothing should break or regress here, this only enables more
possibilities.
Many years ago I built and demoed a prototype of a simple web ui with a
slider, and as you moved it left and right, it started up or shutdown
some number of virtual machines.
The webui was standalone code, but the rough idea of having events from
a high-level overview flow into mgmt, was what I wanted to test out. At
this stage, I didn't even have the language built yet. This prototype
helped convince me of the way a web ui would fit into everything.
Years later, I build an autogrouping prototype which looks quite similar
to what we have today. I recently picked it back up to polish it a bit
more. It's certainly not perfect, and might even be buggy, but it's
useful enough that it's worth sharing.
If I had more cycles, I'd probably consider removing the "store" mode,
and replace it with the normal "value" system, but we would need the
resource "mutate" API if we wanted this. This would allow us to directly
change the "value" field, without triggering a graph swap, which would
be a lot less clunky than the "store" situation.
Of course I'd love to see a GTK version of this concept, but I figured
it would be more practical to have a web ui over HTTP.
One notable missing feature, is that if the "web ui" changes (rather
than just a value changing) we need to offer to the user to reload it.
It currently doesn't get an event for that, and so don't confuse your
users. We also need to be better at validating "untrusted" input here.
There's also no major reason to use the "gin" framework, we should
probably redo this with the standard library alone, but it was easier
for me to push out something quick this way. We can optimize that later.
Lastly, this is all quite ugly since I'm not a very good web dev, so if
you want to make this polished, please do! The wasm code is also quite
terrible due to limitations in the compiler, and maybe one day when that
works better and doesn't constantly deadlock, we can improve it.
I think we were not benefitting from the cache and sending unnecessary
events. It would be great to have tests for this, but commit this fix
for now, and be embarrassed in the future if I got this code wrong.
In my carelessness, I was re-using pointers when a fact was used twice!
This could cause disastrous consequences like a double close panic on a
datetime.now() fact for example.
In other news, we should consider if it's possible to get more clever
about graph shape optimization so that we don't need more than once
instance of certain functions like datetime.now() in our graph.
Most of the time, we don't need to have a dynamic call sub graph, since
the actual function call could be represented statically as it
originally was before lambda functions were implemented. Simplifying the
graph shape has important performance benefits in terms of both keep the
graph smaller (memory, etc) and in avoiding the need to run transactions
at runtime (speed) to reshape the graph.
Co-authored-by: Samuel Gélineau <gelisam@gmail.com>
This commit implements a range function that mimicks python's range
built-in by having a start, stop, and range argument. There's also
a few examples and tests to mimick Python's examples to guarantee
we're consistent with their behaviour.
This adds initial symlink support to the file resource, and while it is
hopefully correct, there are always sneaky edge cases around symlinks
and security, so review and tests are highly encouraged!
