On Jan 27, 2016 1:57 PM, "Gregg Reynolds" <d...@mobileink.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 1:28 PM, Timothy Baldridge <tbaldri...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> It seems to me that there has to be a simpler approach to what you are trying to accomplish. To that end, what is your end goal, and why is "splitting the cljs into a .cljs file is not an option"? > > > The end goal is a unified language (Clojure/script) for writing Web Component apps, specifically defining and using Polymer components. As a simple example of what I mean by that, consider the symmetry between (ns foo (:require ...)) in a Clojure file, and <head><link rel="import" ...> ...</head> in an HTML file. They effectively do the same job: locate, load, and register some resources in the local env. So if I want to use Polymer paper elements, instead of writing a <link> element, I write: > > (h/require '[polymer.paper :as paper :refer [button card]]) > > And to use a js or css resource, I write a "(h/import ...)" that looks just like a Clojure import declaration. Of course there's some configuration code I'm not showing, but it's pretty straightforward and can be used across projects. > > When it comes to defining components, Polymer is pretty complex. But if you stare at it long enough various Deep and Beautiful Symmetries will begin to emerge - components are like types, as are behaviors; event suites and listeners are effectively protocols (or co-protocols), etc. So in the end we hide all the HTML+JS complexity, and code to define a Polymer component looks pretty much exactly like the code for an ordinary deftype. That includes inline method definitions - which in this case are callback or listener definitions. I guess you could argue that the language for fn definitions it is not really clojurescript, it's more like a clojure extension or DSL if you prefer that just looks like clojurescript. When evaluated it generates clojurescript. > > Or another way of looking at it: we replace HTML+JS with Clojure + Clojurescript. Still not quite a single unified language, but pretty darned close. > > So I guess the simple answer to why the clojurescript cannot be split out is because I want to support inline definitions. >
Correction: putting the cljs in a separate cljs file will be an option. I just don't want it to be a requirement. G -- 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.
