This seems a bit better:
define foo(
Enum["present", "absent"] $ensure = "present",
Optional[String] $ssh_authorized_file = undef,
Optional[String] $email = undef,
Optional[Integer] $uid = undef,
Optional[Integer] $gid = undef,
Variant[Boolean, String] $sudoer = false,
Boolean $setup_shell = false,
Boolean $setup_rbenv = false
) {
It's relatively easy to achieve with Tabular but I do agree on the advanced
structs, that's some crazy.
This is the best that I could do:
Struct[
{
mode => Enum[read, write, update],
path => Optional[String[1]],
NotUndef[owner] => Optional[String[1]]
}
]
I honestly have no idea if that will process correctly though, it's
massively tedious, and it would probably need a lot of commenting.
Trevor
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 10:36 AM, R.I.Pienaar <r...@devco.net> wrote:
> hello,
>
> I've done a few little things with the type system and really like what it
> achieves,
> was able to find a few bad data items in my hiera data and it saves on a
> lot of the
> super annoying validation function calls.
>
> The syntax though is pretty difficult to use, consider:
>
> define foo(
> Enum["present", "absent"] $ensure = "present",
> Optional[String] $ssh_authorized_file = undef,
> Optional[String] $email = undef,
> Optional[Integer] $uid = undef,
> Optional[Integer] $gid = undef,
> Variant[Boolean, String] $sudoer = false,
> Boolean $setup_shell = false,
> Boolean $setup_rbenv = false
> ) {
>
> So this has a few issues for me:
>
> Reading it, I just don't see the property names now, its become a real
> effort
> to read this.
>
> $ssh_authorized_file Optional[String] = undef,
>
> seems better for this use case to me and this is probably going to be the
> most
> often used use case.
>
> This gets much worse when we involve more complex type definitions, I
> can't imagine
> ever using a full on Struct definition here for example it would render it
> entirely
> unreadable and be impossible to maintain
>
> How would you ever fit this into a param declaration and maintain
> readability:
>
> Struct[{mode => Enum[read, write, update],
> path => Optional[String[1]],
> NotUndef[owner] => Optional[String[1]]}]
>
> This leads to my 2nd question, I couldn't find a way to make my own
> abstract
> types.
>
> Consider this hypothetical with made up syntax and all:
>
> site.pp:
> typedef MyData Struct[{mode => Enum[read, write, update],
> path => Optional[String[1]],
> NotUndef[owner] => Optional[String[1]]}]
>
> foo.pp:
> define foo(Mydata $data) {
>
> this would improve matters a whole lot. Does a typedef like feature
> exist? I couldn't
> find anything and tried a few things but failed
>
>
> ---
> R.I.Pienaar
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Puppet Users" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-users/143546306.116227.1438266987939.JavaMail.zimbra%40devco.net
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
--
Trevor Vaughan
Vice President, Onyx Point, Inc
(410) 541-6699
-- This account not approved for unencrypted proprietary information --
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Puppet Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-users/CANs%2BFoXyp8fCPdna4v_%2B1oMwWfjgRu9X4fT6ZHONnfz5ZfdM_g%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
