https://pantsbuild.org/ logo
#development
Title
# development
h

hundreds-father-404

05/21/2020, 12:20 AM
Yes. In a perfect world, it would be nice to have precise deps. But yes, I’m arguing that is it not worth the additional complexity, given how common of a pattern it already is to filter out irrelevant targets + the
for_sources_type=[PythonSources]
. It’s already fairly complex that plugin authors have to write
HydrateSourcesRequest(tgt[Sources], enable_codegen=True, for_sources_types=[PythonSources, ResourcesSources, FilesSources])
. Adding that they now have to say `DependenciesRequest(tgt[Dependencies], for_dependencies_type=PythonDependencies)`—which also means that we need to create a
PythonDependencies
field—is not great. (We only subclass
Dependencies
in exactly 1 place right now, and the sole reason we do it is to override docstring. It’d be great to avoid a proliferation of
Dependencies
subclasses. We will need subclasses for each codegen protocol target type, but that’s it, I think)