Although addrs.Target can in principle capture the information we need to
represent move endpoints, it's semantically confusing because
addrs.Targetable uses addrs.Abs... types which are typically for absolute
addresses, but we were using them for relative addresses here.
We now have specialized address types for representing moves and probably
other things which have similar requirements later on. These types
largely communicate the same information in the end, but aim to do so in
a way that's explicit about which addresses are relative and which are
absolute, to make it less likely that we'd inadvertently misuse these
addresses.
These three types represent the three different address representations we
need to represent different stages of analysis for "moved" blocks in the
configuration.
The goal here is to encapsulate all of the static address wrangling inside
these types so that users of these types elsewhere would have to work
pretty hard to use them incorrectly.
In particular, the MovableEndpoint type intentionally fully encapsulates
the weird relative addresses we use in configuration so that code
elsewhere in Terraform can never end up holding an address of a type that
suggests absolute when it's actually relative. That situation only occurs
in the internals of MoveableEndpoint where we use not-really-absolute
AbsMoveable address types to represent the not-yet-resolved relative
addresses.
This only takes care of the static address wrangling. There's lots of
other rules for what makes a "moved" block valid which will need to be
checked elsewhere because they require more context than just the content
of the address itself.
Our documentation for ModuleCall originally asserted that we didn't need
AbsModuleCall because ModuleInstance captured the same information, but
when we added count and for_each for modules we introduced
ModuleCallInstance to represent a reference to an instance of a local
module call, and now _that_ is the type whose absolute equivalent is
ModuleInstance.
We previously had no absolute representation of the call itself, without
any particular instance. That's what AbsModuleCall now represents,
allowing us to be explicit about when we're talking about the module block
vs. instances it declares, which is the same distinction represented by
AbsResource vs. AbsResourceInstance.
Just like with AbsResource and AbsResourceInstance though, there is
syntactic ambiguity between a no-key call instance and a whole module call,
and so some codepaths might accept both to start and then use other
context to dynamically choose a particular interpretation, in which case
this distinction becomes meaningful in representing the result of that
decision.
The previous name didn't fit with the naming scheme for addrs types:
The "Abs" prefix typically means that it's an addrs.ModuleInstance
combined with whatever type name appears after "Abs", but this is instead
a ModuleCallOutput combined with an InstanceKey, albeit structured the
other way around for convenience, and so the expected name for this would
be the suffix "Instance".
We don't have an "Abs" type corresponding with this one because it would
represent no additional information than AbsOutputValue.
* command/jsonstate: remove redundant remarking of resource instance
ResourceInstanceObjectSrc.Decode already handles marking values with any marks stored in ri.Current.AttrSensitivePaths, so re-applying those marks is not necessary.
We've gotten reports of panics coming from this line of code, though I have yet to reproduce the panic in a test.
* Implement test to reproduce panic on #29042
Co-authored-by: David Alger <davidmalger@gmail.com>
Because our snippet generator is trying to select whole lines to include
in the snippet, it has some edge cases for odd situations where the
relevant source range starts or ends directly at a newline, which were
previously causing this logic to return out-of-bounds offsets into the
code snippet string.
Although arguably it'd be better for the original diagnostics to report
more reasonable source ranges, it's better for us to report a
slightly-inaccurate snippet than to crash altogether, and so we'll extend
our existing range checks to check both bounds of the string and thus
avoid downstreams having to deal with out-of-bounds indices.
For completeness here I also added some similar logic to the
human-oriented diagnostic formatter, which consumes the result of the
JSON diagnostic builder. That's not really needed with the additional
checks in the JSON diagnostic builder, but it's nice to reinforce that
this code can't panic (in this way, at least) even if its input isn't
valid.
Martin Atkins