Skip to content

feat: add interpreter detection for various script types #1618

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
May 6, 2025

Conversation

zelosleone
Copy link
Collaborator

closes #1611

i was debating whetever i should add a UTF-8 validation but i thought it should be added just in case for windows computers with asian languages, let me know what you think about it @wolfv

Also, as shown in recipe examples we still hold the requirements/run to not to cause a magicial workflow, because i thought people want to control exactly what they want to run with

@zelosleone zelosleone marked this pull request as draft May 4, 2025 16:36
@zelosleone zelosleone marked this pull request as ready for review May 4, 2025 16:48
@zelosleone zelosleone requested a review from wolfv May 4, 2025 16:49
@@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ requests = ">=2.32.2,<2.33"
syrupy = "4.6.*"
rust-src = ">=1.86.0,<1.87"
boto3 = "*"
nushell = "==0.104.0"
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think this can be reverted since you are also requesting nushell in the build requirements of the recipe.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nope, github runners for some reason doesnt see it without adding specially to lock file. This could be a bug btw

# Conflicts:
#	test/end-to-end/test_simple.py
tests:
- script: build.nu
requirements:
run:
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Wrt to removing nushell from pixi, would it work if you use build here, instead of run?

@zelosleone
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Don't merge pls, i will fix the git test section, i messed up the conflict solving with jetbrains merge tool

@zelosleone
Copy link
Collaborator Author

fixed! @wolfv

@wolfv wolfv merged commit 4a5b0c1 into prefix-dev:main May 6, 2025
21 checks passed
@zelosleone zelosleone deleted the autodiscovery branch May 6, 2025 08:47
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Auto-discover interpreter based on script filename
2 participants