Capture output of eval plugin and some girls scout changes

[dschrempf]

This PR contains some girl-scout changes as well as changes to how the eval plugin treats stdout and stderr.

Eval plugin

We now capture output to stdout and stderr induced as a possible side effect by the statement being evaluated. This is fragile because the output may be scrambled in a concurrent setting when HLS is writing to one of these file handles from a different thread.

Fixes #1977, most likely also #4390 (although this is debatable, we could do something more sophisticated).

-- >>> putStrLn "Hello"
-- Hello

-- >>> hPutStrLn stderr "Hello"
-- Hello

-- >>> putStrLn "Hello," >> pure "World!"
-- Hello,
-- "World!"

Girl scout changes

• Docs: Fix some links in eval plugin in-source documentation
• Clarify documentation of expected test failure
• Update Nix Flake (Darwin issues seem to be solved)
• Update some tests and avoid mentioning GHC 9.2
• Remove comment referring to GHC 9.2 and fix code

[fendor]

Needs a proper test in hls-eval-plugin, but otherwise looks good to me, thank you for the clean up! Feel free to merge once you've added a test :)

[fendor]

Slightly weird, probably needs to be fixed one way or another?

[dschrempf]

I didn't realize the eval plugin changed some other results. Thanks for picking that up. I will investigate.

[dschrempf]

I fixed those WAS NOW errors, one question though:

Does the plugin also evaluate all actions in the same comment block in your case?

If I evaluate one action in this comment block, all of them get evaluated and a lot of WAS NOW messages get added. Some of them are wrong. I am not sure if this PR added this discrepancy, or if the problem was already there before. I will check.

[fendor]

After locally running, I can confirm I also get these errors, independent of your changes.
This is how this file looks like after running eval:

diff --git a/plugins/hls-eval-plugin/src/Ide/Plugin/Eval/Handlers.hs b/plugins/hls-eval-plugin/src/Ide/Plugin/Eval/Handlers.hs
index 1f19b5b47..0ae407bcb 100644
--- a/plugins/hls-eval-plugin/src/Ide/Plugin/Eval/Handlers.hs
+++ b/plugins/hls-eval-plugin/src/Ide/Plugin/Eval/Handlers.hs
@@ -426,8 +426,14 @@ A, possibly multi line, error is returned for a wrong declaration, directive or
 Some flags have not been recognized: -XNonExistent
 
 >>> cls C
-Variable not in scope: cls :: t0 -> t
-Data constructor not in scope: C
+WAS Variable not in scope: cls :: t0 -> t
+WAS Data constructor not in scope: C
+NOW Illegal term-level use of the class `C'
+NOW   defined at <interactive>:1:2
+NOW In the first argument of `cls', namely `C'
+NOW In the expression: cls C
+NOW In an equation for `it_a2KTO': it_a2KTO = cls C
+NOW Variable not in scope: cls :: t0_a2KVe[tau:1] -> t1_a2KVg[tau:1]
 
 >>> "A
 lexical error in string/character literal at end of input
@@ -437,16 +443,20 @@ in GHCi or doctest. This allows it to be used as a hack to simulate print until
 get proper IO support. See #1977
 
 >>> 3 `div` 0
-divide by zero
+WAS divide by zero
+NOW *** Exception: divide by zero
 
 >>> error "Something went wrong\nbad times" :: E.SomeException
-Something went wrong
+WAS Something went wrong
+NOW *** Exception: Something went wrong
 bad times
 
 Or for a value that does not have a Show instance and can therefore not be displayed:
 >>> data V = V
 >>> V
-No instance for (Show V) arising from a use of ‘evalPrint’
+WAS No instance for (Show V) arising from a use of ‘evalPrint’
+NOW No instance for `Show V' arising from a use of `evalPrint'
+NOW In a stmt of an interactive GHCi command: evalPrint it_a2LvA
 -}
 evals :: Recorder (WithPriority Log) -> Bool -> TEnv -> DynFlags -> [Statement] -> Ghc [Text]
 evals recorder mark_exception fp df stmts = do

[fendor]

I think, we probably need to ignore these.

[dschrempf]

Alright! Thanks for confirming. I will make some room this week ;-).

Did we conclude on whether we should limit the maximum output? I think we decided not to have a limit, did we?

[theGhostJW]

who are you asking?

[dschrempf]

@fendor

But also everybody else if they have an opinion or a fact to add, please go ahead!

[theGhostJW]

This could be an interesting surprise for some users. I often eval expressions that produce > 1000 lines of IO. In my case detailed pretty printed logs. If this was to suddenly be rendered in the code editor I'd need to change my workflow. If i wasn't expecting it, it would be quite confusing.

[dschrempf]

Yes, if this is your workflow. In theory, we could limit the amount of output. The underlying library redirects output to a temporary file and then reads this temporary file. We could amend the function so that it only takes the first N lines of this file (or bytes, or whatever).