14 Commits (f-langserver)

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Martin Atkins	8b511524d6	Initial steps towards AbsProviderConfig/LocalProviderConfig separation (#23978) ... * Introduce "Local" terminology for non-absolute provider config addresses In a future change AbsProviderConfig and LocalProviderConfig are going to become two entirely distinct types, rather than Abs embedding Local as written here. This naming change is in preparation for that subsequent work, which will also include introducing a new "ProviderConfig" type that is an interface that AbsProviderConfig and LocalProviderConfig both implement. This is intended to be largely just a naming change to get started, so we can deal with all of the messy renaming. However, this did also require a slight change in modeling where the Resource.DefaultProviderConfig method has become Resource.DefaultProvider returning a Provider address directly, because this method doesn't have enough information to construct a true and accurate LocalProviderConfig -- it would need to refer to the configuration to know what this module is calling the provider it has selected. In order to leave a trail to follow for subsequent work, all of the changes here are intended to ensure that remaining work will become obvious via compile-time errors when all of the following changes happen: - The concept of "legacy" provider addresses is removed from the addrs package, including removing addrs.NewLegacyProvider and addrs.Provider.LegacyString. - addrs.AbsProviderConfig stops having addrs.LocalProviderConfig embedded in it and has an addrs.Provider and a string alias directly instead. - The provider-schema-handling parts of Terraform core are updated to work with addrs.Provider to identify providers, rather than legacy strings. In particular, there are still several codepaths here making legacy provider address assumptions (in order to limit the scope of this change) but I've made sure each one is doing something that relies on at least one of the above changes not having been made yet. * addrs: ProviderConfig interface In a (very) few special situations in the main "terraform" package we need to make runtime decisions about whether a provider config is absolute or local. We currently do that by exploiting the fact that AbsProviderConfig has LocalProviderConfig nested inside of it and so in the local case we can just ignore the wrapping AbsProviderConfig and use the embedded value. In a future change we'll be moving away from that embedding and making these two types distinct in order to represent that mapping between them requires consulting a lookup table in the configuration, and so here we introduce a new interface type ProviderConfig that can represent either AbsProviderConfig or LocalProviderConfig decided dynamically at runtime. This also includes the Config.ResolveAbsProviderAddr method that will eventually be responsible for that local-to-absolute translation, so that callers with access to the configuration can normalize to an addrs.AbsProviderConfig given a non-nil addrs.ProviderConfig. That's currently unused because existing callers are still relying on the simplistic structural transform, but we'll switch them over in a later commit. * rename LocalType to LocalName Co-authored-by: Kristin Laemmert <mildwonkey@users.noreply.github.com>	6 years ago
James Bardin	35107acc46	allow "terraform" in destroy provisioners ... The values supplied in terraform are static, and do not create any dependencies.	6 years ago
James Bardin	c376905adc	it's safe for destroy provisioners to access path ... The path values are statically loaded, and do not create any dependencies that could cause problems with destroy provisioners.	6 years ago
Martin Atkins	ff4ea042c2	config: Allow module authors to specify validation rules for variables ... The existing "type" argument allows specifying a type constraint that allows for some basic validation, but often there are more constraints on a variable value than just its type. This new feature (requiring an experiment opt-in for now, while we refine it) allows specifying arbitrary validation rules for any variable which can then cause custom error messages to be returned when a caller provides an inappropriate value. variable "example" { validation { condition = var.example != "nope" error_message = "Example value must not be \"nope\"." } } The core parts of this are designed to do as little new work as possible when no validations are specified, and thus the main new checking codepath here can therefore only run when the experiment is enabled in order to permit having validations.	6 years ago
Martin Atkins	b90fb25321	experiments: a mechanism for opt-in experimental language features ... Traditionally we've preferred to release new language features in major releases only, because we can then use the beta cycle to gather feedback on the feature and learn about any usability challenges or other situations we didn't consider during our design in time to make those changes before inclusion in a stable release. This "experiments" feature is intended to decouple the feedback cycle for new features from the major release rhythm, and thus allow us to release new features in minor releases by first releasing them as experimental for a minor release or two, adjust for any feedback gathered during that period, and then finally remove the experiment gate and enable the feature for everyone. The intended model here is that anything behind an experiment gate is subject to breaking changes even in patch releases, and so any module using these experimental features will be broken by a future Terraform upgrade. The behavior implemented here is: - Recognize a new "experiments" setting in the "terraform" block which allows module authors to explicitly opt in to experimental features. terraform { experiments = [resource_for_each] } - Generate a warning whenever loading a module that has experiments enabled, to avoid accidentally depending on experimental features and thus risking unexpected breakage on next Terraform upgrade. - We check the enabled experiments against the configuration at module load time, which means that experiments are scoped to a particular module. Enabling an experiment in one module does not automatically enable it in any other module. This experiments mechanism is itself an experiment, and so I'd like to use the resource for_each feature to trial it. Because any configuration using experiments is subject to breaking changes, we are free to adjust this experiments feature in future releases as we see fit, but once for_each is shipped without an experiment gate we'll be blocked from making significant changes to it until the next major release at least.	7 years ago
James Bardin	8547603ff5	deprecation warning for destroy provisioner refs ... Add deprecation warning for references from destroy provisioners or their connections to external resources or values. In order to ensure resource destruction can be completed correctly, destroy nodes must be able to evaluate with only their instance state. We have sufficient information to validate destroy-time provisioners early on during the config loading process. Later on these can be converted to hard errors, and only allow self, count.index, and each.key in destroy provisioners. Limited the provisioner and block evaluation scope later on is tricky, but if the references can never be loaded, then they will never be encountered during evaluation.	7 years ago
Martin Atkins	91752f02da	configs: Warn for deprecated interpolation and quoted type constraints ... Following on from de652e22a2, this introduces deprecation warnings for when an attribute value expression is a template with only a single interpolation sequence, and for variable type constraints given in quotes. As with the previous commit, we allowed these deprecated forms with no warning for a few releases after v0.12.0 to ensure that folks who need to write cross-compatible modules for a while during upgrading would be able to do so, but we're now marking these as explicitly deprecated to guide users towards the new idiomatic forms. The "terraform 0.12upgrade" tool would've already updated configurations to not hit these warnings for those who had pre-existing configurations written for Terraform 0.11. The main target audience for these warnings are newcomers to Terraform who are learning from existing examples already published in various spots on the wider internet that may be showing older Terraform syntax, since those folks will not be running their configurations through the upgrade tool. These warnings will hopefully guide them towards modern Terraform usage during their initial experimentation, and thus reduce the chances of inadvertently adopting the less-readable legacy usage patterns in greenfield projects.	7 years ago
Martin Atkins	79dc808614	configs: Emit warnings for deprecated quoted references/keywords ... Terraform 0.12.0 removed the need for putting references and keywords in quotes, but we disabled the deprecation warnings for the initial release in order to avoid creating noise for folks who were intentionally attempting to maintain modules that were cross-compatible with both Terraform 0.11 and Terraform 0.12. However, with Terraform 0.12 now more widely used, the lack of these warnings seems to be causing newcomers to copy the quoted versions from existing examples on the internet, which is perpetuating the old and confusing quoted form in newer configurations. In preparation for phasing out these deprecated forms altogether in a future major release, and for the shorter-term benefit of giving better feedback to newcomers when they are learning from outdated examples, we'll now re-enable those deprecation warnings, and be explicit that the old forms are intended for removal in a future release. In order to properly test this, we establish a new set of test configurations that explicitly mark which warnings they are expecting and verify that they do indeed produce those expected warnings. We also verify that the "success" tests do _not_ produce warnings, while removing the ones that were previously written to succeed but have their warnings ignored.	7 years ago
Pam Selle	e7d8ac5ad7	Remove panic, update comment	7 years ago
Thayne McCombs	7c678d104f	Add support for for_each for data blocks. ... This also fixes a few things with resource for_each: It makes validation more like validation for count. It makes sure the index is stored in the state properly.	7 years ago
Pam Selle	7d905f6777	Resource for_each	7 years ago
Alex Pilon	0450f487fa	move IsEmptyDir to configs package	7 years ago
James Bardin	8111050c66	ensure we record diagnostics from nested modules ... When loading nested modules, the child module diagnostics were dropped in the recursive function. This mean that the config from the submodules wasn't fully loaded, even though no errors were reported to the user. This caused further problems if the plan was stored in a plan file, when means only the partial configuration was stored for the subsequent apply operation, which would result in unexplained "Resource node has no configuration attached" errors later on. Also due to the child module diagnostics being lost, any newly added nested modules would be silently ignored until `init` was run again manually.	7 years ago
Radek Simko	5b9f2fafc8	Standardise directory name for test data	7 years ago