Commit graph

14 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
joeduffy
9d9c57335f Rename macro to func; rename mu/func to mu/lambda 2016-12-14 16:44:31 -08:00
joeduffy
5b791aab77 Introduce intrinsic types
This change eliminates the special type mu/extension in favor of extensible
intrinsic types.  This subsumes the previous functionality while also fixing
a number of warts with the old model.

In particular, the old mu/extension approach deferred property binding until
very late in the compiler.  In fact, too late.  The backend provider for an
extension simply received an untyped bag of stuff, which it then had to
deal with.  Unfortunately, some operations in the binder are inaccessible
at this point because doing so would cause a cycle.  Furthermore, some
pertinent information is gone at this point, like the scopes and symtables.

The canonical example where we need this is binding services names to the
services themselves; e.g., the AWS CloudFormation "DependsOn" property should
resolve to the actual service names, not the string values.  In the limit,
this requires full binding information.

There were a few solutions I considered, including ones that've required
less code motion, however this one feels the most elegant.

Now we permit types to be marked as "intrinsic."  Binding to these names
is done exactly as ordinary name binding, unlike the special mu/extension
provider name.  In fact, just about everything except code-generation for
these types is the same as ordinary types.  This is perfect for the use case
at hand, which is binding properties.

After this change, for example, "DependsOn" is expanded to real service
names precisely as we need.

As part of this change, I added support for three new basic schema types:

* ast.StringList ("string[]"): a list of strings.
* ast.StringMap ("map[string]any"): a map of strings to anys.
* ast.ServiceList ("service[]"): a list of service references.

Obviously we need to revisit this and add a more complete set.  This work
is already tracked by marapongo/mu#9.

At the end of the day, it's likely I will replace all hard-coded predefined
types with intrinsic types, for similar reasons to the above.
2016-12-05 13:46:18 -08:00
joeduffy
0d6208bb00 Simplify cf/template extension provider
For now, we can simply auto-map the Mu properties to CF properties,
eliminating the need to manually map them in the templates.  Eventually
we'll want more sophistication here to control various aspects of the CF
templates, but this eliminates a lot of tedious manual work in the meantime.
2016-11-23 14:16:35 -08:00
joeduffy
14bce9804f Move aws/cf spec underneath a "resource" property
This changes the layout of the aws/cf extension to specify the CloudFormation
resource underneath a "resource" property.
2016-11-19 12:17:54 -08:00
joeduffy
a31e59fa3a Implement the aws/cf extension provider
This change implements the aws/cf extension provider, so that AWS resources
may be described and encapsulated inside of other stacks.  Each aws/cf instantiation
requires just two fields -- type and properties -- corresponding to the equivalent
AWS resource object.  The result is simply plugged in as an AWS resource, after
Mu templates have been expanded, permitting stack properties, etc. to be used.
2016-11-19 11:13:15 -08:00
joeduffy
ed0710dd0b Rename parameters to properties
The more I live with the current system, the more I prefer "properties" to
"parameters" for stacks and services.  Although it is true that these things
are essentially construction-time arguments, they manifest more like properties
in the way they are used; in fact, if you think of the world in terms of primary
constructors, the distinction is pretty subtle anyway.

For example, when creating a new service, we say the following:

        services:
                private:
                        some/service:
                                a: 0
                                b: true
                                c: foo

This looks like a, b, and c are properties of the type some/service.  If, on
the other hand, we kept calling these parameters, then you'd arguably prefer to
see the following:

        services:
                private:
                        some/service:
                                arguments:
                                        a: 0
                                        b: true
                                        c: foo

This is a more imperative than declarative view of the world, which I dislike
(especially because it is more verbose).

Time will tell whether this is the right decision or not ...
2016-11-19 10:34:51 -08:00
joeduffy
43fe8de15b Add a reminder to decide on "local" flavors 2016-11-07 11:26:07 -08:00
joeduffy
c6cdb9a7ae Add a note on AWS IAM mapping
...plus a handful of random TODOs.
2016-11-06 10:02:06 -08:00
joeduffy
216b2867eb Add a reminder to figure out "secret" storage as a service 2016-11-04 13:21:47 -07:00
joeduffy
b176a3b314 Reorganize some remaining TODOs 2016-11-04 13:19:24 -07:00
joeduffy
2226584cff Add a note about IAM, credentials, region, etc. flowing from AWS IaaS to CaaS 2016-11-04 13:10:50 -07:00
joeduffy
25e0979da3 Add initial thoughts on EC2 Container Service (ECS) targeting 2016-11-04 12:53:45 -07:00
joeduffy
9836600e73 Do a bit of random wordsmithing as I proofread 2016-11-04 11:34:30 -07:00
joeduffy
47d8044e9a Split the metadata spec from the targets doc
This change separates the metadata specification from the targets doc,
since they are both meant to be consumable independent of one another
and will evolve at their own paces.
2016-11-04 11:23:59 -07:00