Hey, with this PR I want to focus on improving how the configuration is read and used when running any arc command.
For this, a new type ArcConfiguration was created which is a record type where each field represents a section in the configuration files. The fields themselves each contain a map. By this I hope to minimize the overhead when adding the new values to the sections. Let me know what you think about the design of this type.
The ArcConfiguration is created by merging settings from different sources where default configuration is shadowed by global configuration is shadowed by local configuration is shadowed by argument configuration
I split the configuration into two files: Configuration.fs contains general tools for reading and editing config files. ArcConfiguration.fs contains specific functions for providing these configurations to all commands. Maybe another naming would be beneficial to emphasize the distinction.
(This PR does not yet include the configuration CLI)
Hey, with this PR I want to focus on improving how the configuration is read and used when running any arc command.
For this, a new type
ArcConfigurationwas created which is a record type where each field represents a section in the configuration files. The fields themselves each contain a map. By this I hope to minimize the overhead when adding the new values to the sections. Let me know what you think about the design of this type.The
ArcConfigurationis created by merging settings from different sources wheredefault configuration is shadowed by global configuration is shadowed by local configuration is shadowed by argument configurationI split the configuration into two files:
Configuration.fscontains general tools for reading and editing config files.ArcConfiguration.fscontains specific functions for providing these configurations to all commands. Maybe another naming would be beneficial to emphasize the distinction.(This PR does not yet include the configuration CLI)