From 020c1e77489b772f854bb3288b9c8d2818a6bf9d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: EuAndreh <eu@euandre.org>
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2025 02:17:12 -0300
Subject: git mv src/content/* src/content/en/

---
 src/content/en/blog/2020/10/05/swift2nix.adoc | 194 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 194 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 src/content/en/blog/2020/10/05/swift2nix.adoc

(limited to 'src/content/en/blog/2020/10/05/swift2nix.adoc')

diff --git a/src/content/en/blog/2020/10/05/swift2nix.adoc b/src/content/en/blog/2020/10/05/swift2nix.adoc
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9a3c6fe
--- /dev/null
+++ b/src/content/en/blog/2020/10/05/swift2nix.adoc
@@ -0,0 +1,194 @@
+= swift2nix: Run Swift inside Nix builds
+:sort: 0
+
+:empty:
+:nix: https://nixos.org/
+:swift2nix: link:swift2nix.tar.gz
+
+While working on a Swift project, I didn't find any tool that would allow Swift
+to run inside {nix}[Nix] builds.  Even thought you _can_ run Swift, the real
+problem arises when using the package manager.  It has many of the same problems
+that other package managers have when trying to integrate with Nix, more on this
+below.
+
+I wrote a simple little tool called {swift2nix}[swift2nix] that allows you trick
+Swift's package manager into assuming everything is set up.  Here's the example
+from swift2nix's README file:
+
+[source,nix]
+----
+let
+  niv-sources = import ./nix/sources.nix;
+  pkgs = import niv-sources.nixpkgs { };
+  src = pkgs.nix-gitignore.gitignoreSource [ ] ./.;
+  swift2nix = pkgs.callPackage niv-sources.swift2nix {
+    package-resolved = ./Package.resolved;
+  };
+in pkgs.stdenv.mkDerivation {
+  inherit src;
+  name = "swift-test";
+  buildInputs = with pkgs; [ swift ];
+  phases = [ "unpackPhase" "buildPhase" ];
+  buildPhase = ''
+    # Setup dependencies path to satisfy SwiftPM
+    mkdir .build
+    ln -s ${swift2nix.env.dependencies-state-json} .build/dependencies-state.json
+    ln -s ${swift2nix.env.checkouts} .build/checkouts
+
+    # Run the tests
+    swift test
+    touch $out
+  '';
+}
+----
+
+The key parts are lines 15~17: we just fake enough files inside `.build/` that
+Swift believes it has already downloaded and checked-out all dependencies, and
+just moves on to building them.
+
+I've worked on it just enough to make it usable for myself, so beware of
+unimplemented cases.
+
+== Design
+
+What swift2nix does is just provide you with the bare minimum that Swift
+requires, and readily get out of the way:
+
+. I explicitly did not want to generated a `Package.nix` file, since
+  `Package.resolved` already exists and contains the required information;
+. I didn't want to have an "easy" interface right out of the gate, after
+  fighting with "*2nix" tools that focus too much on that.
+
+The final actual code was so small (46 lines) that it made me think about
+package managers, "*2nix" tools and some problems with many of them.
+
+== Problems with package managers
+
+I'm going to talk about solely language package managers.  Think npm and cargo,
+not apt-get.
+
+Package managers want to do too much, or assume too much, or just want to take
+control of the entire build of the dependencies.
+
+This is a recurrent problem in package managers, but I don't see it as an
+intrinsic one.  There's nothing about a "package manager" that prevents it from
+_declaring_ what it expects to encounter and in which format.  The _declaring_
+part is important: it should be data, not code, otherwise you're back in the
+same problem, just like lockfiles are just data.  Those work in any language,
+and tools can cooperate happily.
+
+There's no need for this declarative expectation to be standardized, or be made
+compatible across languages.  That would lead to a poor format that no package
+manager really likes.  Instead, If every package manager could say out loud what
+it wants to see exactly, than more tools like swift2nix could exist, and they
+would be more reliable.
+
+This could even work fully offline, and be simply a mapping from the lockfile
+(the `Package.resolved` in Swift's case) to the filesystem representation.  For
+Swift, the `.build/dependencies-state.json` comes very close, but it is internal
+to the package manager.
+
+Even though this pain only exists when trying to use Swift inside Nix, it sheds
+light into this common implicit coupling that package managers have.  They
+usually have fuzzy boundaries and tight coupling between:
+
+. resolving the dependency tree and using some heuristic to pick a package
+  version;
+. generating a lockfile with the exact pinned versions;
+. downloading the dependencies present on the lockfile into some local cache;
+. arranging the dependencies from the cache in a meaningful way for itself
+  inside the project;
+. work using the dependencies while _assuming_ that step 4 was done.
+
+When you run `npm install` in a repository with no lockfile, it does 1~4.  If
+you do the same with `cargo build`, it does 1~5.  That's too much: many of those
+assumptions are implicit and internal to the package manager, and if you ever
+need to rearrange them, you're on your own.  Even though you can perform some of
+those steps, you can't compose or rearrange them.
+
+Instead a much saner approach could be:
+
+. this stays the same;
+. this also stays the same;
+. be able to generate some JSON/TOML/edn which represents the local expected
+  filesystem layout with dependencies (i.e. exposing what the package manager
+  expects to find), let's call it `local-registry.json`;
+. if a `local-registry.json` was provided, do a build using that.  Otherwise
+  generate its own, by downloading the dependencies, arranging them, _etc._
+
+The point is just making what the package manager requires visible to the
+outside world via some declarative data.  If this data wasn't provided, it can
+move on to doing its own automatic things.
+
+By making the expectation explicit and public, one can plug tools _à la carte_
+if desired, but doesn't prevent the default code path of doing things the exact
+same way they are now.
+
+== Problems with "*2nix" tools
+
+:node2nix: https://github.com/svanderburg/node2nix
+
+I have to admit: I'm unhappy with most of they.
+
+They conflate "using Nix" with "replicating every command of the package manager
+inside Nix".
+
+The avoidance of an "easy" interface that I mentioned above comes from me
+fighting with some of the "*2nix" tools much like I have to fight with package
+managers: I don't want to offload all build responsibilities to the "*2nix"
+tool, I just want to let it download some of the dependencies and get out of the
+way.  I want to stick with `npm test` or `cargo build`, and Nix should only
+provide the environment.
+
+This is something that {node2nix}[node2nix] does right.  It allows you to build
+the Node.js environment to satisfy NPM, and you can keep using NPM for
+everything else:
+
+[source,sh]
+----
+ln -s ${node2nix-package.shell.nodeDependencies}/lib/node_modules ./node_modules
+npm test
+----
+
+Its natural to want to put as much things into Nix as possible to benefit from
+Nix's advantages.  Isn't that how NixOS itself was born?
+
+But a "*2nix" tool should leverage Nix, not be coupled with it.  The above
+example lets you run any arbitrary NPM command while profiting from isolation
+and reproducibility that Nix provides.  It is even less brittle: any changes to
+how NPM runs some things will be future-compatible, since node2nix isn't trying
+to replicate what NPM does, or fiddling with NPM's internal.
+
+**A "*2nix" tool should build the environment, preferably from the lockfile
+directly and offload everything else to the package manager**.  The rest is just
+nice-to-have.
+
+swift2nix itself could provide an "easy" interface, something that allows you to
+write:
+
+[source,sh]
+----
+nix-build -A swift2nix.release
+nix-build -A swift2nix.test
+----
+
+The implementation of those would be obvious: create a new
+`pkgs.stdenv.mkDerivation` and call `swift build -c release` and `swift test`
+while using `swift2nix.env` under the hood.
+
+== Conclusion
+
+Package managers should provide exact dependencies via a data representation,
+i.e. lockfiles, and expose via another data representation how they expect those
+dependencies to appear on the filesystem, i.e. `local-registry.json`.  This
+allows package managers to provide an API so that external tools can create
+mirrors, offline builds, other registries, isolated builds, _etc._
+
+"*2nix" tools should build simple functions that leverage that
+`local-registry.json`{empty}footnote:local-registry[
+  This `local-registry.json` file doesn't have to be checked-in the repository
+  at all.  It could be always generated on the fly, much like how Swift's
+  `dependencies-state.json` is.
+] data and offload all the rest back to the package manager itself.  This allows
+the "*2nix" to not keep chasing the package manager evolution, always trying to
+duplicate its behaviour.
-- 
cgit v1.2.3

