Writing Nix

Write boring, explicit Nix that follows this skill’s opinionated style. Prefer module merge semantics, narrow scopes, and simple attrset composition over decorative abstractions.

Quick Start

1. Read repository docs only for hard constraints or project-specific layout. Do not weaken the style rules in this skill unless the user explicitly asks.
2. Identify the task shape and load only the relevant reference files:
   • references/module-style.md: module templates, option design, merge priority, mkDefault, mkForce, and mkMerge.
   • references/bindings.md: let locality, single-use bindings, inherit (...), and bulky inline expressions.
   • references/assertions-and-warnings.md: when to fail evaluation, when to warn, and when simpler typing is better.
   • references/anti-patterns.md: with, rec, chained conditionals, and other style hazards that should usually block a proposed refactor.
3. Apply the narrowest ruleset needed. Do not bulk-load every reference file unless the task truly spans them.

Always Prefer

• Explicit lib. usage, or a justified local inherit (...).
• Local bindings over hoisted helper names.
• Module-system merging over hand-written if/else.
• Small, intentional option surfaces.
• Normal assignments, mkDefault, and mkForce used intentionally by merge priority.

Style Authority

• Treat this skill as the default style guide for Nix code.
• Use repository docs for hard constraints, integration details, or required module layout, not to dilute the style guidance here.
• If a repository’s local conventions conflict with this skill, call out the conflict explicitly instead of silently blending the styles.
• Avoid with lib;.
• Keep edits surgical; do not clean up unrelated Nix while touching a module.

Validation

After edits, run the most relevant repo checks available for the task (nix fmt, focused eval/build/test, or module-specific validation).

Output Contract

Report:

CHANGES MADE:
- <file>: <what changed and why>

THINGS I DIDN'T TOUCH:
- <file>: <why intentionally unchanged>

POTENTIAL CONCERNS:
- <risk or follow-up checks>