#Hey dotnet daggernauts. I wrote the SDK

1 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)

eternal plume
#

I've made an effort to keep performance optimization in mind throughout development (it's hard for me not to, as I focus a lot on low-level optimization for embedded platforms at work). Right now everything is at least as fast as the Go SDK, with code generation being 3x as fast as Go (on my laptop, YMMV).

Features that I cared about particularly:

  • Immutable & IEnumerable suport. Dagger array params always take IEnumerable, so you don't have to do .ToList() or .ToArray() off of LINQ compositions. Which, by the way, Dagger and LINQ go together like peanut butter and jelly.
  • Native nullability integration. Optional parameters are optional parameters. They aren't passed via a separate struct, as in the other SDKs. Why do WithDirectory(..., new(){ Owner = "foo" }) when you can do WithDirectory(..., owner: "foo")?
  • Task suport. Your module functions can return Task and Task<Foo>, and can accept task parameters. Module objects can have Task<Foo> fields even.
  • No attributes required. We already have public vs internal. All public members of a module are introspected. An optional attribute is used for specifying default path and ignores for directory parameters (and it supports setting a default for the whole assembly or a whole object, no need to reiterate the path and ignores per every function as in other SDKs).

Work yet to do includes

  • Enums
  • Interfaces
  • Controls for logging verbosity
  • Suport compiling projects inside of the module runtime. Right now it expects them to have been pre-compiled.
  • Support generating and updating the csproj file.
  • Work out kinks and edge-cases
  • Build targets that use MSBuild features to make it super easy one-click to run and debug in dagger from host IDE
pulsar yacht
#

cc @red adder @night wind @winged field

eternal plume
#

If any of you have a chance to read my implementation details, don't hesitate to ask questions or suggest feedback.

red adder
winged field
#

i really need to make auto signing happen, its annoying

eternal plume
#

Hi @red adder, agreed. It will be interesting to see what collaborating looks like. Frankly, I wish you guys had looked at my implementation from last year. You would have found for example that I already did the Roslyn syntax tree approach that Patrick is recently experimenting with. My work is much further along in functionality and in a different direction in many ways, so it's not obvious how to reconcile. Do we swap to mine as a base, or PR my improvements in piece by piece. I'm sure you don't want to get used to a new base as much as I don't want to bother with reconciling. I'll present a tour of my code over the next few days and I hope the quality speaks for itself and wins you over. I'll also continue looking through what you've done for anything that I'm lacking. For example, I see you guys have a more robust set of error codes, and support for more versions of dotnet.

winged field
eternal plume
#

That's the idea. I'll post a bit of a demo tonight. If you would like to do a call, I'm available outside of 9-5 Pacific time (yes it's past 9 now, I'm getting a late start on my workday).

winged field
#

I think all 3 of us are on completely different timezones entirely 😄

red adder
#

I'm available before 9 because 9 is midnight on my time zone. 😭

wooden mural
#

Hi friends, did you get a chance to talk and find a way to collaborate? ❤️

winged field
#

Hey solomon, not yet 😦 Theres one PR open which Ive added a few improvements to the one we merged a while back. Probably we should merge and close that off (even if we dont use all of it)