Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by nxrabl 701 days ago
This seems like such a no-brainer architectural choice that it makes me wonder if there's some tradeoff I'm not seeing. Why would Nix have cached failures in the first place?
1 comments

It seems to make more sense than not having them to me -- nix is all about reproducibility. If you didn't change anything, why would you get a different result? Instead of spending 15 seconds on evaluations, just tell me "you didn't change anything doofus -- cached error."