Bulk out Module support for specific requirements

[ikelos]

This should ensure that modules more explicitly state what requirements they have which should also allow that to be recorded more accurately in the configuration when needed.

@Abyss-W4tcher please could you test this (after adding your own requirements to your new Module type) and report back whether the values you need get stored appropriately or not.

[Abyss-W4tcher]

I will try it soon and keep you informed 👍

[Abyss-W4tcher]

I have merged these changes, and tried on a basic sample mac-sample-1.bin, and adding random non-optional requirements isn't preventing the module from instantiating.

In fact, get_requirements() doesn't seem to be called in the first place.

[Abyss-W4tcher]

Hi, any update on this feature ?

[ikelos]

No, not yet sorry, I need to find time to unpick why get_requirements isn't getting called appropriately...

[ikelos]

Ok, so my mistake. It turns out it's not the Module that's used to figure out its requirements, it's the ModuleRequirement which specifies them, meaning for a specific module to be loaded, we can't just create a new ArmModule with different requirements, we'd need to define a custom ArmModuleRequirement which somewhat does away with the point of trying to keep things modular. As such this branch is duff and I'm going to close it off.

In the larger picture of getting the Mac stuff in the right way, I'm afraid it's back to the drawing board for a little bit to figure out how to get optional requirements for a ModuleRequiement (I suspect it'll come down to a MacModuleRequirement, which isn't ideal, but may be workable)...