Thanks Sean, simple api is really main goal in Flow design. Initially we had much more sugar, but resulting version is pretty concise. We use it in production at Eventum, mostly in graphql resolvers/mutations and we're quite happy with it.
четверг, 8 ноября 2018 г., 21:18:18 UTC+2 пользователь Sean Corfield написал: > > Flow reminds me a bit of a project I started in early 2015 and decided to > sunset in late 2016: https://github.com/seancorfield/engine > > > > We actually used Engine at work for a while but decided the resulting code > was both harder to read and not really very idiomatic. I’ll be interested > to hear how people find Flow in production – it’s a lot more focused and > simpler than Engine (which is definitely a good thing! 😊 ). > > > > Sean Corfield -- (970) FOR-SEAN -- (904) 302-SEAN > An Architect's View -- http://corfield.org/ > > "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." > -- Margaret Atwood > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* clo...@googlegroups.com <javascript:> <clo...@googlegroups.com > <javascript:>> on behalf of alex <fmn...@gmail.com <javascript:>> > *Sent:* Wednesday, November 7, 2018 2:05:28 PM > *To:* Clojure > *Subject:* Re: An Error spec? > > How about using exception instances as errors? That plays pretty nicely > with ex-info and (try ... (catch Exception e e)). I've built > https://github.com/dawcs/flow on top of that approach and that seems > like pretty good abstraction. Despite I'm not sure about CLJS. > Anomalies are also great and you may check out > https://github.com/dawcs/anomalies-tools for some tooling around it. But > you may still need a bridge to convert exceptions caught from 3rd-party > java libs into anomalies structure. And despite Cognitect roots, it doesn't > feel like "official standard". > > пятница, 26 октября 2018 г., 4:46:54 UTC+3 пользователь Didier написал: >> >> I've started to see a pattern in my spec like this: >> >> (s/or :success string? >> :error ::error) >> >> And I've been tempted to create my own spec macro for this. But I also >> thought, maybe Spec itself should have such a spec. >> >> (s/error <success-spec> <error-spec>) >> >> What do people think? >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Clojure" group. > To post to this group, send email to clo...@googlegroups.com <javascript:> > Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with > your first post. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > clojure+u...@googlegroups.com <javascript:> > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Clojure" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to clojure+u...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
