These helpers determine the value that would be used for a particular
schema construct if the configuration construct it represents is not
present (or, in the case of *Block, empty) in the configuration.
This is different than cty.NullVal on the implied type because it might
return non-null "empty" values for certain constructs if their absence
would be reported as such during a decode with no required attributes or
blocks.
This is not a recommended method, but it does serve to verify that the
set values in the ResourceData internal state are correctly computed,
which indicates that the expected configuration was passed in.
The synthetic config value used to create the Apply diff should contain
no unknown config values. Any remaining UnknownConfigValues were due to
that being used as a placeholder for values yet to be computed, and
these should be marked NewComputed in the diff.
Add a diff test using a shcema with ConfigModeAttr.
It's in the test provider, because that is what is mostly responsible
for exercising diff.Apply, and where the other tests are.
When a top-level list-of-object contains an attribute that is also
list-of-object we need to do the fixup again inside the nested body (using
our synthetic attributes-only schema) so that the attr-as-blocks mechanism
can apply within the nested blocks too.
The v0.12 language supports numeric constants only in decimal notation, as
a simplification. For rare situations where a different base is more
appropriate, such as unix-style file modes, we've found it better for
providers to accept a string containing a representation in the
appropriate base, since that way the interpretation can be validated and
it will be displayed in the same way in the rendered plan diff, in
outputs, etc.
We use tv.Value() here to mimick how HCL 1 itself would have interpreted
these, and then format them back out in the canonical form, which
implicitly converts any non-decimal constants to decimal on the way
through.
The re-introduction of some of the ambiguity between argument and nested
block syntax (for compatibility with existing provider patterns)
unfortunately leads to some interesting consequences for attributes using
this mode.
While the behavior is generally as before in straightforward cases, this
page aims to spell out some of the different usage patterns explicitly
for the benefit of those writing more complex configurations, such as
generic re-usable modules where using argument vs. block syntax leads to
some real differences.
This page is intentionally not linked from anywhere in the part of the
website maintained in the Terraform repository. Instead, it can be linked
from the provider documentation for any argument where this pattern is
used, to help users understand the ways in which that argument might
deviate from the usual behaviors of arguments vs. nested blocks.
Previously it was calling directly to hcldec.Variables, and thus missing
the special fixups we do inside ReferencesInBlock to deal with
Terraform-specific concerns such as our attribute-as-blocks preprocessing.
Stripping these was a patch for some provider behavior which was fixed
in other ways, and is no longer needed.
Removing this allows us to implement correct CusomizeDiffFuncs in
providers so that they can mark fields with empty values as computed
during a plan.
These are the largest source of the old "diffs didn't match after apply"
errors. It's almost always an upstream dependency that caused the final
error.
A list-like attribute containing null values will present a list to
helper/schema with nils, which can cause panics. Since null values were
not possible in configuration before HCL2 and not supported by the
legacy SDK, return an error to the user.
Some providers may generate quite large schemas, and the internal
default grpc response size limit is 4MB. 64MB should cover most any use
case, and if we get providers nearing that we may want to consider a
finer-grained API to fetch individual resource schemas.
Nulls can't exist in HCL, and the legacy sdk will panic when
encountering them. The map shim already did this, just copy the same
pattern in the list case.
In order to preserve pre-v0.12 idiom for list-of-object attributes, we'll
prefer to use block syntax for them except for the special situation where
the user explicitly assigns an empty list, where attribute syntax is
required in order to allow existing provider logic to differentiate from
an implicit lack of blocks.
Martin Atkins