This document describes the standard Nix format, as first established by RFC 166.
Controversial changes to this document must go through another RFC. It is up to the Nix formatting team to decide when an RFC is necessary.
- Brackets:
[]
- Braces:
{}
- Parentheses:
()
- Expressions: All syntax nodes that would be a syntactically correct Nix program on their own.
- Terms: The following expressions are called terms
- Variables, int, float, string, path, list, set, selection, all parenthesised expressions
- As a rule of thumb: Expressions which can be used as list items (without parentheses)
- Absorption:
A multiline expression can have an alternative layout depending on the context.
In that case, it will start on the end of the current line instead of a new line,
potentially saving a level of indentation of its content.
{ # The right-hand side of bindings is an example of a situation where absorption improves the style. absorbed = with bar; [ 1 2 3 ]; notAbsorbed = with bar; # Placing a comment here will force the non-absorbed, multiline layout. [ 1 2 3 ]; # In this case, absorption does not reduce the indentation level of the set. absorbed' = let qux = 1; in # { is absorbed bar: baz: { # <-- same level }; notAbsorbed' = let qux = 1; in way: too: many: arguments: { # <-- same level }; }
- Absorbable Terms:
Attribute sets, lists, and multiline
''
strings are called absorbable terms. Parenthesized absorbable terms are absorbable terms again too.
-
The formatter should be as "pure" as possible, i.e. different input formats of the "same" code (same AST with comments) should result in the same output format.
- The formatter may take the input formatting into account in some cases in order to preserve multi-line syntax elements (which would otherwise have been contracted by the rules).
-
Line breaks may be added or removed, but empty lines must not be created. Single empty lines must be preserved, and consecutive empty lines must be collapsed into a single empty line. This allows the formatter to expand or compact multi-line expressions, while still allowing grouping of code.
For example, formatting this code:
[ 0 10 ( 20 + 1 ) 30 ]
turns into this:
[ 0 # Line break added 10 (20 + 1) # Line breaks removed # Consecutive empty lines turned into a single empty line 30 ]
-
Expressions of the same kind that can be treated as a sequence of expressions on the same level should be treated as such, even though they are technically parsed as a nested tree.
- This applies to else-if chains, functions with multiple arguments, some operators, etc.
- Example:
# This is treated as a sequence of if-then-else chains, instead of indenting the second if as part of the else body if cond1 then foo else if cond2 then bar else baz
-
Indentation should reflect the expression structure. Example:
# Bad, the indentation misleads the user { foo = { bar = if baz == null then 10 else 20 ; }; } # Good { foo = { bar = if baz == null then 10 else 20; }; }
This editor config specifies the basic details about Nix files:
end_of_line = lf
insert_final_newline = true
trim_trailing_whitespace = true
charset = utf-8
indent_style = space
For any two (sub-)expressions that are fully on a common single line, their smallest common ancestor expression must also be on the same line.
Example
# Bad, expressions cond and foo are fully on the same line,
# but their smallest common ancestor expression is the entire if-then-else, which spans multiple lines
if cond then foo
else bar
# Okay, cond, foo and bar have the if-then-else as a common ancestor expression,
# which is also fully on the same line
if cond then foo else bar
# Bad, due to function application precedence, the smallest common ancestor expression
# of foo and bar is `foo || bar baz`, which spans two lines
foo || bar
baz
Rationale
This rule has turned out to be very practical at catching code that could be potentially hard to understand or edit.
- There should be a configurable soft line length limit, limiting the number of characters on one line without counting the leading indentation. The default should be 100 characters.
- There may also be a configurable hard line length limit, which includes the leading indentation.
- String-like values such as strings, paths, comments, urls, etc. may go over the hard line length limit.
- Two spaces must be used for each indentation level.
- This may be revisited should Nix get proper support for using tabs for indentation in the future.
- No special care is taken to preserve vertical alignment in the AST or comments.
- It is non-trivial to specify a rule for preserving vertical alignment, so this is out of scope for now, but could be reconsidered in the future.
- Examples:
{ # Vertically aligned input like this.. foo = 10; # Foo b = 10; # - b baz = 10; # - baz more = 10; # - more # ..will get formatted like this. # The vertical alignment is not preserved. foo = 10; # Foo b = 10; # - b baz = 10; # - baz more = 10; # - more # Vertically aligned input like this.. netbsd = { execFormat = elf; families = { inherit bsd; }; }; none = { execFormat = unknown; families = { }; }; # ..will get formatted like this. netbsd = { execFormat = elf; families = { inherit bsd; }; }; none = { execFormat = unknown; families = { }; }; # Vertically aligned input like this.. optExecFormat = lib.optionalString (kernel.name == "netbsd" && gnuNetBSDDefaultExecFormat cpu != kernel.execFormat ) kernel.execFormat.name; # ..will get formatted like this. optExecFormat = lib.optionalString ( kernel.name == "netbsd" && gnuNetBSDDefaultExecFormat cpu != kernel.execFormat ) kernel.execFormat.name; }
- Increasing indentation levels must not be "skipped": On subsequent lines, indentation can only increase by at most one level, but may decrease arbitrarily many levels.
- Examples:
# Bad indentation buildInputs = [ foo # <-- Not okay, increase by 2 levels ] ++ lib.optionals cond [ bar ]; # Okay indentation, subsequent lines at most one more level buildInputs = [ foo ] ++ lib.optionals cond [ bar ]; # Bad indentation attribute = { args }: let foo = "bar"; # <-- Not okay, increase by 2 levels in foo; # Okay indentation attribute = { args }: let foo = "bar"; in foo; # Bad indentation (callFunction { foo = "bar"; # <-- Not okay, increase by 2 levels } arg ) # Okay indentation (callFunction { foo = "bar"; } arg ) # Okay indentation let x = { a = foo bar baz; }; # <-- The decrease by two levels here is okay, only increases are limited to one level in null
- Examples:
Unless stated otherwise, any expression that fits onto one single line must be trivially formatted as such.
For list elements, attributes, and function arguments, the following applies:
- If expanded into multiple lines, each item must be on its own line.
- Grouping similar items together can be done by adding blank lines or comments between the groups instead.
- This also applies to the first item, so e.g.
[ firstElement
in a multi line list is not allowed.
- Long sequences of items should be liberally expanded, even if they would fit onto one line character-wise.
- The motivation is to keep the information per line manageable. Usually "number of elements" is a better metric for that than "line length".
- The cutoff is usually determined empirically based on common usage patterns.
Examples:
{
buildInputs = [
foo
bar
baz
somethingElse
];
systemd.services = {
foo = { };
bar = { };
};
inherit
lib
foo
bar
baz
;
}
- The kind of quotes used in strings (
"
vs''
) must be preserved from the input. - The non-interpolated string parts must be preserved from the input
- E.g. changing
\t
to a tab character must not be done automatically
- E.g. changing
Examples:
# Kept as is
"foo \n\t ${bar} baz"
# This one too
''
foo \n\t ${bar} baz
''
# Even if strings exceed the line length limit, no attempt to make it smaller is made
''
This is a really long string that would not fit within the line length limit
''
- "Simple" interpolations must be rendered using the single-line format, regardless of the line's length.
- Otherwise, the multiline formatting must be used
- "simple" is implementation-defined and generally includes short expressions of low complexity. Multiline expressions are never "simple".
- If the interpolation is the first thing on the string line, then its contents may be absorbed.
- Otherwise, the interpolation code must start on a new line
Examples:
# Short and simple
"foo \n\t ${bar} baz"
# Interpolation of simple or short code
# Good
throw ''Some very long error messages containing ${variables} and stuff''
# Bad
throw ''Some very long error messages containing ${
variables
} and stuff''
''
# Don't absorb interpolations if they don't start the line
# Good
some longer line ${
some function [
1
2
]
} baz
# Bad
some longer line ${some function [
1
2
]} baz
# However, absorption is allowed here, since the interpolation starts a line
${other function (
# with stuff
)}
''
/**
comments must be handled according to RFC 0145: Doc comments.- Specifically, the expression that the comment is attached to must be maintained by the formatter, as well as the resulting doc string.
- Empty comments may be deleted.
- Often their only purpose is to vertically align lines, which is not allowed.
- Single-line
/*
comments must be converted to#
comments. - Single-line comments may be moved up or down a line to improve the layout.
- Anything after the first
#
of single-line comments must be preserved.- This allows the common pattern of prefixing many lines with
#
to comment them out, without the formatter trying to change anything.
- This allows the common pattern of prefixing many lines with
- For multiline
/*
and/**
comments:- Both
/*
//**
and*/
start on a new line each, and are vertically aligned (i.e. have the same level of indentation). - The left-most line in between have one extra level of indentation (relative to the starting
/*
//**
).- Inner-comment indentation is preserved, in a similar way as for multiline strings.
- Whitespace immediately after
/*
//**
and whitespace before*/
may not be preserved. - Content after
/*
//**
on the same line may get shifted the next line. - Comments where all intermittent lines start with a
*
may have it stripped.- Otherwise, the non-whitespace content of each comment line must be preserved.
- Both
Examples:
Note that these examples show allowed transformations, which may or may not be applied by the formatter.
/* foo */
↓
# foo
/*bar */
↓
# bar
function call ( # trailing comment
body
)
↓
function call (
# trailing comment
body
)
if /* inline comment */ cond then
true
else
false
↓
# inline comment
if cond then
true
else
false
if cond /* inline comment */ then
true
then
false
↓
if
cond # inline comment
then
true
else
false
/* foo */ ''
bar
''
↓
# foo
''
bar
''
/* Foo
bar
baz */
↓
/*
Foo
bar
baz
*/
/* Foo
bar
baz
*/
↓
/*
Foo
bar
baz
*/
/* Foo
* bar
*/
↓
/*
Foo
bar
*/
# Some comment
# Some preserved indentation
#This also stays as is
Alternatives:
-
There are some ways of using multi-line comments to comment parts of strings that wouldn't otherwise support comments. For example in bash
some-command \ # Some comment some-arg \ # Some comment another-arg
is not valid. In Nix we have the ability to use string concatenation and inline comments to add comments between the arguments:
'' some-command \ '' + /* Some comment */ '' some-arg \ '' + /* Some comment */ '' another-arg ''
This style of the
+
operator for one isn't consistent with the rest of the formatting rules.Alternatively:
some-command \ ${""/* Some comment */} some-arg \ ${"" /* Some comment */} another-arg
But this is considered too hacky.
In a function application chain, the first element is treated as the "function" and the remaining ones as "arguments".
- As many arguments as possible must be fit onto the first line.
- If there is at most one multi-line argument that can be absorbed and all other arguments before/after fit onto a single line respectively, then that multi-line argument is absorbed.
- Otherwise, the first argument not fitting onto the first line will start a new line with indentation, and all subsequent arguments will start on their own line as well.
- All arguments that are not on the same line as the function must be indented by one level.
- If the last argument is parenthesized, the parentheses should get absorbed while its body is put on a new line with indentation.
- Exception: If the last argument is parenthesized and its body contains an absorbable term, an alternative and more compact layout may be used instead: The body gets compacted and its term absorbed.
- In this case, the inner term may be force-expanded.
- This results in less indentation for many common Nix idioms.
- Exception: If the last argument is parenthesized and its body contains an absorbable term, an alternative and more compact layout may be used instead: The body gets compacted and its term absorbed.
Examples:
# All arguments fit onto the first line
function arg1 arg2
# The line length limit is reached, so the remaining arguments need to be on their own lines
function arg1 arg2 arg3
arg4
arg5
# The last argument is a multiline expression, so it doesn't fit on the first line,
# but it can still start on the first line
function arg1 arg2 {
more = "things";
}
# The second argument doesn't fit on the first line, but it's not the last argument,
# so it needs to start on a new line
function arg1 {
more = "things";
} arg3
# In this case, the remaining arguments after the second one woulnd't fit onto the line anymore, therefore start all of them on a new line
function arg1
{
more = "things";
}
arg3
many
long
args
# Same with multiple multiline arguments
function
{
a = 1;
b = 2;
}
{
c = 1;
d = 2;
}
# Assume that the line length limit is here ↓
# Good
concatMapString (s: "short string: ${s}") (
attrsToList foo
)
# Good, this is also allowed
concatMapString (s: "short string: ${s}")
(attrsToList foo)
# Bad: The first argument would have fit onto the first line
concatMapString (
s: "short string: ${s}"
) (attrsToList foo)
# Good: The body of the last argument starts on a new line with indentation
pkgs.nixosTest (
{ pkgs }:
{
config = { };
}
)
# Good: The last argument is parenthesised and contains a function declaration, the exception makes this have less lines
stdenv.mkDerivation (finalAttrs: {
name = "...";
})
Drawbacks
- This style sometimes forces lists or attribute sets to start on a new line, with additional indentation of their items.
Alternatives
- Compacting multiline arguments like this:
function arg1 { # stuff } arg3 function { # ... } { # ... }
- This violates the guideline of the indentation representing the expression structure, and thus reduces readability.
- The body of the function must not be indented relative to its first arguments.
- A small number of ("simple") identifier arguments can be written onto the same line.
- Otherwise they're each on their own line.
- The body may get absorbed here
- Attribute set arguments must always start on a new line and they must not be mixed with identifier arguments.
- If they have few attributes, the argument may be written on a single line
- Otherwise each attribute must be on its own line with indentation, followed by a trailing comma.
- Due to structural similarity and for consistency reasons, attribute set arguments with a default value follow the same rules as bindings.
Examples
#1
name: value: name ++ value
#2 absorption
name: value: ''
${name} = ${value};
''
#3
name: value:
name
++ value
++ more stuff making the line too long
#4
{ pkgs }: pkgs.hello
#5
args@{
some,
argument,
default ? value,
...
}:
{
# body
}
#6
{ pkgs }:
name: value:
{
# body
}
#7: These would be over the line length limit on a single line
aaaa:
bbbb:
cccc:
dddd:
eeee:
null
#8: @ patterns can also come afterwards
{ pkgs }@args: pkgs.hello
Alternatives
-
Have leading commas for parameters in attribute set arguments, like currently done in Nixpkgs.
- This makes attribute set arguments less likely to be confused with lists.
- It's easier to see where arguments start and end.
{ some , arg }: args@{ some , argument # Single line comment , commentedArgument , # Comment on the value # multiline comment default ? value , ... }: # ...
Problems with this alternative:
- Moving items around with this style may require editing lines.
- Inconsistent with the expression expansion guidelines, which disallows forms like
{ some
;some
should start on a new line instead. - This does not work well with leading
@
bindings. - It's unclear whether comments belong to the next or the previous argument.
- The leading comma style was a lesser-evil workaround for the lack of trailing commas in the Nix language. Now that the language has this feature, there is no reason to keep it that way anymore.
From the list of operators, this section focuses on binary operators. Function application and attribute selection are not treated as an "operator" in the sense of this section, see function application instead.
Operators with no associativity are non-chainable. Each invocation will always have exactly one left-hand side and one right-hand side.
The right-hand side must always be attached to the operator on the same line. The operator must either be attached to the left-hand side as well, or start on a new line.
shortVariable == 42
stringLength (drvName (toString oldDependency))
== stringLength (drvName (toString newDependency))
some complicated calculation {
# arguments
} == other stuff {
# which may be multiline
}
some complicated calculation {
# arguments
}
== "some very long string"
Chained binary associative operators with the same or monotonically decreasing precedence must be treated together as a single operator chain.
If an operator chain does not fit onto one line, it must be expanded such that every operator starts a new line:
- If the operand can also fit on the same line as the operator, it must be put there
- Otherwise, the operand must either be absorbed or start a new line with indentation
Operator chains in bindings may be compacted as long as all lines between the first and last one are indented.
Examples
# These chained associative operators have increasing precedence, so they're _not_ treated the same
foo
-> # <- The operator starts on a new line, but right operand is all of the below lines, they don't fit here, so indent
bar
||
baz
&& qux # <- The operand fits on this line
# These chained associative operators have decreasing precedence, so they're treated the same
foo
&& bar # <- All of these operands are just identifiers, they fit on the same line
|| baz # <- We shouldn't indent these lines, because it misleads into thinking that || binds stronger than &&
-> qux
[
some
flags
]
++ ( # <- Parenthesized expressions get absorbed
foo
)
++ optionals condition [ # <- As are some multiline function applications
more
items
]
++
runCommand name # <- Function application which cannot be absorbed start on a new line with indentation
''
echo hi
''
test
# In bindings we can use a more compact form as long as all in-between lines are indented.
{
foo = bar // {
x = 10;
y = 20;
} // baz;
}
# Bad, we can't use the more compact form because an intermediate line is not indented.
{
foo = {
x = 10;
y = 20;
} // bar // {
z = 30;
w = 40;
};
}
# Good, this is the non-compact operator form
{
foo =
{
x = 10;
y = 20;
}
// bar
// {
z = 30;
w = 40;
};
}
# Good
{
postPatch =
''
patchShebangs .
''
+ lib.optionalString withFrei0r ''
substituteInPlace libavfilter/vf_frei0r.c \
--replace /usr/local/lib/frei0r-1 ${frei0r}/lib/frei0r-1
substituteInPlace doc/filters.texi \
--replace /usr/local/lib/frei0r-1 ${frei0r}/lib/frei0r-1
'';
configureFlags =
[
# * Program flags
(enableFeature buildFfmpeg "ffmpeg")
(enableFeature buildFfplay "ffplay")
(enableFeature buildFfprobe "ffprobe")
]
++ optionals withBin [ "--bindir=${placeholder "bin"}/bin" ]
++ [
# ...
];
}
if
andelse
keywords must always start on a new line.- The
if
andelse
bodies must always be indented. - If the condition does not fit onto one line, then it will start on the next line with indentation, and
then
will be on the start of the line following the condition. else if
chains are treated as one long sequence, with no indentation creep on each step.else if
chains must not be on a single line.
Examples
# Condition fits on one line
if builtins.length matches != 0 then
{ inherit path matches; }
else if path == /. then
[
1
2
]
else
go (dirOf path);
# Condition doesn't fit onto one line
if
matches != null
&& builtins.length matches != 0
then
{ inherit path matches; }
else if path == /. then
null
else
go (dirOf path);
Alternatives
- The bodies could be absorbed in some cases, saving an indentation level:
#1a if builtins.length matches != 0 then { inherit path matches; } else if path == /. then [ 1 2 ] else go (dirOf path);
- This results in inconsistent vertical start of the keywords, making the structure harder to follow
- Have the
then
on the start of the next line, directly followed by the if body:#1b if builtins.length matches != 0 then { inherit path matches; } else if path == /. then [ 1 2 ] else go (dirOf path); #1c if builtins.length matches != 0 then { inherit path matches; } else if path == /. then [ 1 2 ] else go (dirOf path);
assert <cond>;
mirrors the formatting for bindings.assert
s<body>
must always start on their own line and the body also starts on its own line without any additional indentation.
# Good
assert foo;
[
bar
baz
]
# Bad
assert foo; [
bar
baz
]
# Good
{
vendor ?
assert false;
null,
vendor ? null,
}:
null
let
# Good
x =
assert foo;
bar;
# Bad
y = assert foo;
bar;
in
x
# Multiline condition
assert
let
x = true;
in x;
true
# Function call condition with absorbed last argument, same formatting as bindings
assert assertMsg (isPath path) ''
lib.path.append:
The first argument is of type ${builtins.typeOf path}, but a path was expected
'';
true
Alternatives
- Treat it the same as
with
. The reasons not to do that:assert
's stand on their own and could be removed without breaking anything. Comparatively,with
's can't be removed without breaking the codeassert
's are a bit likeif-then-else
statements, which are also spread out over multiple lines
- In any situation where a term would get absorbed, the term with a
with
prepended to it may get absorbed as well. - Otherwise, the body of
with attrs;
must start on a new line without any additional indentation.
Examples
{
# Good
foo = with bar; [
# multiline
baz
];
# Good
foo =
with foo;
with bar;
[
# multiline
baz
];
# Good
foo =
with bar;
baz foo {
# multiline
qux = 10;
};
# Good
foo =
with bar;
if cond then
foo
else
bar;
# Bad
foo = assert qux; with bar; [
# multiline
baz
];
# Bad
foo = with bar;
[
# multiline
baz
];
# Bad
foo =
with bar; [
# multiline
baz
];
# Good
[
qux
quux
]
++ (with pkgs; [
baz
blorp
]);
}
Let bindings must always have this form:
let
<name1> = <value1>;
<name2> = <value2>;
...
in
<body>
- Let bindings are always multiline.
- Each binding is indented and starts on its own line. For more details, see the bindings section.
- The
<body>
always starts on a new line and is not indented.
Examples
let
foo = "bar";
in
func foo;
let
foo = "bar";
in
{
inherit foo;
baz = "smth";
}
let
foo = "bar";
in
if foo == "bar" then
"hello"
else
"world"
Alternatives
-
To allow having the
<body>
be absorbed after thein
:let <name1> = <value1>; <name2> = <value2>; ... in <body>
In particular when
<body>
is an identifier, list, attribute set and/or others.Problems with this alternative:
- It leads to larger diffs when inserting something after the
in
- The formatting can change when
<body>
is updated - It's less consistent, since the formatting depends on the
<body>
- It leads to larger diffs when inserting something after the
-
The body could be indented by a level
let <name1> = <value1>; <name2> = <value2>; ... in <body>
Problems with this alternative:
- Leads to indentation creeps
- Inconsistent with other expressions that have a
<body>
that is "returned" - Favors a style where the body starts on the same line as the in for some values (e.g. attribute sets) to reduce an indentation level, see above.
- Brackets and braces must always have a space (or line break) on the inside, like
[
,]
,{
and}
.- Empty lists and attribute sets are written as
[ ]
and{ }
, respectively.
- Empty lists and attribute sets are written as
- Lists and attribute sets can only be on a single line if they fit on the line and contain few enough items.
- Lists and attribute sets with more items should be liberally expanded.
- As described under bindings below, nested attribute sets are always expanded.
Examples
[
{ }
{ foo = "bar"; }
{
foo = {
bar = "baz";
};
}
{ foo.bar = "baz"; }
]
[
[ 1 ]
[
2
3
]
]
[
[
1
2
3
]
]
[
{
mySingletons = [
[
({
# stuff in there
})
]
];
mySingletons' = [
[
(function call)
]
];
}
]
Drawbacks
- Singleton lists may use a lot of indentation
Alternatives
- Have a special compact form for singleton lists, to reduce the indentation level and remove two additional lines
foo = [ { # content } ];
Let bindings, attribute sets and default function arguments share the same syntax for their items, which is discussed here together.
For each binding value, if only the first and last line are not indented, the absorbed style is used, otherwise newline and indent.
Bindings have the most special cases to accommodate for many common Nixpkgs idioms. Generally, the following styles exist, which are used depending on the kind and size of the value:
#1 The entire binding fits onto a single line
foo = "bar";
#2 The body fits onto a single line, but the binding is too long
length limit
very.long.foo =
function arg1 arg2 arg3;
#3 Where possible, the body should be absorbed
foo = function {
# args
};
add = x: y: {
result = x + y;
};
#4 If neither single-line nor absorbable, start on a new line with indentation
foo =
function
arg1
arg2
arg3;
# There is non-indented line between the first and last line, so this can't use the absorbed style
bar =
if baz == null then
10
else
20;
Notable special cases are:
- Single line values that would not benefit from style #2 keep using #1, even if this makes it go above the line limit. This mostly applies to simple strings and paths.
- Attribute set values must always be expanded. This has the consequence of always forcing nested attribute sets to be multiline (even if they would be single line otherwise because they only contain a single item), which usually is desired.
{ foo.bar.baz = "qux"; foo' = { bar.baz = "qux"; }; }
- As described in the
with
section,with
expressions of absorbable terms should be treated the same way as absorbable terms.- This means that the attribute set force-expansion also applies to them here.
- This also means that (multi-line)
with
expressions will use style #3 or #4, depending on their body.
# Force-expand short attrset meta = with lib; { maintainers = []; }; # Don't absorb since the body of `with pkgs;` is `with pyPkgs; ...`, which is not absorbable. buildInputs = with pkgs; with pyPkgs; [ some dependencies ];
Alternatives
Function calls could always be absorbed. This would reduce indentation of their arguments in some cases. However, this may look really weird in other cases, especially when the binding is very long:
some.very.long.attr = callFunction
arg1
arg2
arg3;
Consistent with this would be to also absorb let
bindings and other expressions, however this might result in double indentation.
suff = let
foo = "bar"; # <-- double-indentation
in
foo;
The semicolon in bindings must always be placed on the same line as the expression it concludes.
Examples
{
attr1 = bar;
attr2 = function call {
# stuff
};
attr3 =
function call
many
arguments;
attr4 =
let
foo = "bar";
in
some statement;
attr5 =
if foo then
"bar"
else
"baz";
attr6 =
let
foo = false;
in
if foo then "bar" else "baz";
attr7 = function (
if foo then
"bar"
else
"baz"
);
attr8 =
cond1
|| cond2
||
some function call
&& cond3;
}
Alternatives
-
On a new line without indentation.
- This clearly marks a separation between attributes, however it is wasteful of space.
- The lonely semicolon looks odd, and it's not a commonly used style.
attr3 = function call many arguments ; attr3 = let foo = "bar"; in some statements ;
-
On a new line with one indentation level.
- Just as wasteful on space as (1), but a bit less clear about signaling the end of the binding.
attr3 = function call many arguments ;
-
A mix of (1) and (2), where usually the semicolon is placed directly at the end of the binding. But with exceptions in which the semicolon is placed onto the following line instead in cases where the value is a multiline
if
expression or nested operator. These are the only syntax elements that may result in the semicolon being placed on a line with arbitrarily deep indentation.attr4 = if foo then "bar" else "baz" ; attr5 = let foo = false; in foo || bar; attr7 = cond1 || cond2 || some function call && cond3 ;
-
Always wrapping multi-line expressions with parenthesis.
- The parenthesis help "ground" the bindings on the top-level and don't look anywhere near as odd as the lonely semicolon.
- However this is a style not commonly used.
{ attr3 = ( function call many arguments ); attr3 = ( let foo = "bar"; in some statements ); attr3 = ( if foo == "bar" then function call else some statements ); }
The items must either be all on the same line, or all on a new line each (with indentation), in which case the semicolon must be on its own line with indentation.
-
The semicolon placement seems inconsistent between bindings and
inherit
s: For bindings it's on the last line of the expression, while forinherit
s it's on a new line.This is because it's much more common to change items in an
inherit
than other expressions. By placing the semicolon on a new line, items can easily be added and removed at the end.
Examples
inherit foo bar baz;
inherit
foo'
bar'
baz'
;
For a fragment like this:
inherit (<source>) <attr1> ... <attrn>;
- If the entire fragment fits in the first line, it must be formatted as such.
- Otherwise if only
inherit (<source>)
fits into the first line, it must be formatted as such, with the same style as the normalinherit
for the attributes. - Otherwise the
(<source>)
must also be on its own line.
Examples
inherit (pkgs) ap1 ap2 ap3;
inherit (pkgs)
app1
app2
# ...
app42
;
inherit
(pkgs.callPackage ./foo.nix {
arg = "val";
})
attr1
attr2
;