dhall-kubernetes VS terraform-ls

One thing that might help you in this madness is:

https://github.com/dhall-lang/dhall-kubernetes

Type safe, fat finger safe representation of your YAMLs is grossly underrated.

At the moment nothing like that exists. Eventually it should be possible to generate RCL types like https://github.com/dhall-lang/dhall-kubernetes does for Dhall.

I hate yaml with a passion. It marginally better than xml for reading (wins huge on comment syntax) and worse for everything else. It makes zero sense we somehow ended up with it as standard configuration serialization format.

Note yaml is not a DSL. It's a tree serialization format! Everything interesting is happening after it is parsed. Extreme examples point to e.g. github actions conditions.

Anyway, back on topic - maybe not prolog for CDK, but still quite interesting: Dhall-kubernetes - https://github.com/dhall-lang/dhall-kubernetes

At this point, if it’s painful enough, why isn’t compiling-to-yml tools more popular?

Example: https://github.com/dhall-lang/dhall-kubernetes

Haven’t used dhall myself but I’d definitely prefer a DSL on top of yaml.

Dhall provides https://github.com/dhall-lang/dhall-kubernetes which is exactly this: statically type-checked kubernetes config generation.

Dhall is my favorite configuration language that I never get around to using.

I manage DNS in Terraform, and since every Terraform provider uses different objects definitions, and every object definition is rather verbose, Dhall would be a way to specify my own DRY types and leave the provider-specific details in one place. Adding new DNS entries and moving several domains between providers would be a matter of changing fewer lines.

Dhall also has Kubernetes bindings:

https://github.com/dhall-lang/dhall-kubernetes

Although I'm tempted to just stick to Helm here, even though it's less type-safe.

Not Helm directly, but does something like Dhall fit your question? https://github.com/dhall-lang/dhall-kubernetes

Have you heard about Dhall? It’s a programming language used for generating configuration files for a variety of purposes. One of them is to replace old and limited formats such as JSON and YAML. It is DRYable, secure, and even suitable for creating K8s manifests. The latter option isn’t something for anyone: you have to learn a new language and deal with its peculiarities, but it might be really helpful when you have tons of YAML configs. I’ve recently made a short intro to Dhall for K8s in this review.

Best thing is Dhall that I am aware of. Same situation, working as a consultant, forced to use broken things.

https://github.com/dhall-lang/dhall-kubernetes

Lets look at a specific example. Take Kubernetes: everything is yaml, with complete schemas, all the way down. From your perspective this is configuration utopia, right? Meanwhile back in reality k8s is the poster child of "yaml hell". From the day it was released, people took one look at it, gave it a giant NOPE and instantly spawned half a dozen templating languages. The most popular of these is helm, which has a terrible, no good, very bad design: full of potential injection attacks from purely textual string substitution, manually specified indentation to embed parameterized blocks, virtually no intermediate validation, no way to validate unused features, etc etc

Compare to dhall which publishes a complete set of dhall-k8s schema mappings which enables you to factor out any design you want down to as few configuration variables as you like, while validating the configuration generators themselves at design time. https://github.com/dhall-lang/dhall-kubernetes#more-modular-...

Marcin here, one of the OpenTF folks

This repo [0] seems to still be licensed under MPL, so there is no need for an immediate action, but if there is a willingness in the community to take it over and improve, I see no reason why we wouldn't do it.

[0] https://github.com/hashicorp/terraform-ls

For example my other issue with simple click through URLs to resource documentation pages, this would be a simple solution if the resource documentation URL formatting was done to a standard with the resource names.

I have followed this guide: https://github.com/hashicorp/terraform-ls/blob/main/docs/USAGE.md

As /u/fridgedigga, neither LSP implements renaming. The LSP spec can be found here. I don't know how all of this is wired up. At a minimum, you'll need to add a mapping in service.go and handler. The bulk of work is performed in the handlers.

Look at terraform-ls vs terraform-lsp. Both can be used with coc.nvim.

For the LSP, I have never heard of Terraform before but it looks like they have a section on using it with vim/neovim. Not sure if this is already part of what you have tried, but I can't really help more since I have never used it.

This worked, thank you! I found all the cli options here for anyone that needs them.

https://github.com/hashicorp/terraform-ls

These are both fairly limited but you can see every editor (except intellij) uses this under the hood.

I've used them at companies with 300+ terraform repos and have never had much of an issue navigating/understanding TF through Vim.

So, what happens when you run the server from command line and then open your file in Kate? Any difference? Also, is there any command argument for logging and/or debugging the terraform-ls? It might help to find the issue, if any. I found this from the docs.