Greg
Greg
I wrote a doc a while ago explaining the interplay between all these flags and how they affect what output paths look like. Happy to share if anyone wants a...
> I wrote a doc a while ago explaining the interplay between all these flags and how they affect what output paths look like. Happy to share if anyone wants...
@katre for triage.
I also find the validation argument stronger than the namespace argument. I do like the user simplicity of what we have now. As a casual user, it's easier for me...
Of course the status quo is really `ctx.toolchains["//bar_tools:toolchain_type"].setting`, so we're already mixing & matching.
FYI @Wyverald who wrote this file.
Wouldn't https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel/issues/19975 and https://docs.google.com/document/d/1p02Y9joQSgdXtiTA2mJ_UXHBiBDPPTqrO-oJcupLAu8/edit#heading=h.icwoewbtra8 address this? i.e. make the existing `ConfigMatchingProvider` Starlark-accessible, which is already something we want to do.
Do you know what causes the cycle in the `build`? I'll try to dig up a similar issue someone reported recently. Short story is that `genquery` cannot alway resolve cycles...
You're right - apologies. I poked around more and I'm stumped. I get the same error with: ``` genquery( name = "deps", expression = "not a valid expression", scope =...
I think this toy example replicates: ``` config_setting( name = "fastbuild", values = {"compilation_mode": "fastbuild"}, ) config_setting( name = "opt", values = {"compilation_mode": "opt"}, ) genrule( name = "g", srcs...