feat(cli): implement hcl2cdk

[DanielMSchmidt]

pbpaste | cdktf convert --language=... should print the CDKTF-ified version of what you have in your clipboard

[jsteinich]

I'd be happy to try this out on some of our Terraform projects once it is at that point. Just let me know.

[jsteinich]

Would this be hard to add?

[DanielMSchmidt]

No, I just wanted to be explicit about what is currently supported :)

[skorfmann]

That's pretty amazing, looks great! Built and tried it locally as well, seems to work as expected in general. For complex examples, there are a few issues though:

resource "aws_acm_certificate" "example" {
  domain_name       = "example.com"
  validation_method = "DNS"
}

data "aws_route53_zone" "example" {
  name         = "example.com"
  private_zone = false
}

resource "aws_route53_record" "example" {
  for_each = {
    for dvo in aws_acm_certificate.example.domain_validation_options : dvo.domain_name => {
      name   = dvo.resource_record_name
      record = dvo.resource_record_value
      type   = dvo.resource_record_type
    }
  }

  allow_overwrite = true
  name            = each.value.name
  records         = [each.value.record]
  ttl             = 60
  type            = each.value.type
  zone_id         = data.aws_route53_zone.example.zone_id
}

resource "aws_acm_certificate_validation" "example" {
  certificate_arn         = aws_acm_certificate.example.arn
  validation_record_fqdns = [for record in aws_route53_record.example : record.fqdn]
}

resource "aws_lb_listener" "example" {
  # ... other configuration ...

  certificate_arn = aws_acm_certificate_validation.example.certificate_arn
}

produces

const awsAcmCertificateExample = new aws.AcmCertificate(this, "example", {
  domainName: "example.com",
  validationMethod: "DNS",
});
const dataAwsRoute53Zone = new aws.Route53Zone(this, "example", {
  name: "example.com",
  privateZone: false,
});
const awsRoute53RecordExample = new aws.Route53Record(this, "example", {
  allowOverwrite: true,
  name: "${each.value.name}",
  records: ["${each.value.record}"],
  ttl: 60,
  type: "${each.value.type}",
  zoneId: dataAwsRoute53Zone.example.zoneId,
});
awsRoute53RecordAwsRoute53RecordExample.addOverride(
  "for_each",
  `\${{
    for dvo in ${awsAcmCertificateExample.domainValidationOptions} : dvo.domain_name => {
      name   = dvo.resource_record_name
      record = dvo.resource_record_value
      type   = dvo.resource_record_type
    }
  }}`
);
const awsAcmCertificateValidationExample = new aws.AcmCertificateValidation(
  this,
  "example",
  {
    certificateArn: awsAcmCertificateExample.arn,
    validationRecordFqdns: `\${[for record in ${awsRoute53RecordExample.fqn} : record.fqdn]}`,
  }
);
new aws.LbListener(this, "example", {
  certificateArn: awsAcmCertificateValidationExample.certificateArn,
});

The thing which doesn't fit there:

const awsRoute53RecordExample = new aws.Route53Record(this, "example", {
  allowOverwrite: true,
  name: "${each.value.name}",
  records: ["${each.value.record}"],
  ttl: 60,
  type: "${each.value.type}",
  zoneId: dataAwsRoute53Zone.example.zoneId,
});
awsRoute53RecordAwsRoute53RecordExample.addOverride(
  "for_each",
  `\${{
    for dvo in ${awsAcmCertificateExample.domainValidationOptions} : dvo.domain_name => {
      name   = dvo.resource_record_name
      record = dvo.resource_record_value
      type   = dvo.resource_record_type
    }
  }}`
);

Also, the imports attribute seems to be empty in this case. I'd have expected that the AWS provider would have been returned for this example.

[DanielMSchmidt]

Also, the imports attribute seems to be empty in this case. I'd have expected that the AWS provider would have been returned for this example.

Currently I find the provider from the provider config. The imports fields goal is more in the import complete project part, the code part is for on the spot conversion :) Does this make sense?

The thing which doesn't fit there:

Sorry I'm blind to the error, could you push a failing snapshot test for me to fix? :D

[skorfmann]

The override combines resource class name with the variable name: awsRoute53RecordAwsRoute53RecordExample => Route53Record + awsRoute53RecordExample

[DanielMSchmidt]

@skorfmann Ah thank you! Fixed that one :)

[ansgarm]

Did not quite make it through yet, but here is a first set of comments already 👍
I really like the new commands you added to the code after our video review 💪

[ansgarm]

Nice work 💱

[jsteinich]

thanks for taking the time to review

I didn't actually review the code, just started trying it out on some real Terraform projects.

I tried it again this morning and ran into some new issues:

• In a project without any providers, it still tries to run cdktf get, which fails. Probably an unusual case right now, but if we update to use pre-built providers, then will likely be common.
• The git modules failed with cdktf get. Not directly related to this. More of an error with the module auto naming, Could probably generate cdktf.json with the name override matching what it was called in hcl.

[DanielMSchmidt]

In a project without any providers, it still tries to run cdktf get, which fails. Probably an unusual case right now, but if we update to use pre-built providers, then will likely be common.

Oh great point, I wonder if we should change this behaviour in get in general 🤔 but for now I can add an extra check 👍

The git modules failed with cdktf get. Not directly related to this. More of an error with the module auto naming, Could probably generate cdktf.json with the name override matching what it was called in hcl.

Did you try the latest version? I changed the behaviour to use TerraformHclModule for everything besides registry modules

[jsteinich]

I wonder if we should change this behaviour in get in general

I think so, but I was viewing that as a follow up task.

Did you try the latest version? I changed the behaviour to use TerraformHclModule for everything besides registry modules

Yep. The code is updated, but it is still present in cdktf.json

[DanielMSchmidt]

Yep. The code is updated, but it is still present in cdktf.json

That is really weird, I'm using the same check for both 🤔

terraform-cdk/packages/@cdktf/hcl2cdk/lib/generation.ts

Line 423 in 67d261d

.filter(([{ source }]) => isRegistryModule(source))

[jsteinich]

That is really weird, I'm using the same check for both

I'm thinking it's still in moduleRequirements.

[DanielMSchmidt]

Oh right, thank you! Forgot the third part, will do a PR :)

[github-actions]

I'm going to lock this pull request because it has been closed for 30 days. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active issues. If you've found a problem that seems related to this change, please open a new issue and complete the issue template so we can capture all the details necessary to investigate further.