Re: [ANN] Pink 0.2.0, Score 0.3.0

Steven, thank you for continuing to develop Pink & Score! I have some music projects as my slowly-moving-forward-hobbies, and having pure java, no deps like Supercollider, engine for one of them is very precious! пятница, 24 июля 2015 г., 23:47:30 UTC+3 пользователь Steven Yi написал: > > Hi All

Re: Tool authors: ClojureScript support in tools.namespace?

In core.typed I use *parse* and *file* to parse Clojure files and probably ClojureScript files eventually. I resolve the files myself so I don't have strong opinions on 3). Thanks, Ambrose On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 5:14 AM, Stuart Sierra wrote: > Hello to anyone and everyone writing tools for wo

Tool authors: ClojureScript support in tools.namespace?

Hello to anyone and everyone writing tools for working with Clojure and ClojureScript source files … I've been looking into adding better support for ClojureScript in tools.namespace. It's not a trivial problem. Lots of places in tools.namespace assume there is only one kind of source file. Fo

[ANN] Pink 0.2.0, Score 0.3.0

Hi All, I'd like to announce the release of Pink 0.2.0 and Score 0.3.0: [kunstmusik/pink "0.2.0"] [kunstmusik/score "0.3.0"] Pink is an audio engine library, and Score is a library for higher-level music representations (e.g. notes, phrases, parts, scores). ChangeLogs are available at: https:/

Re: Using Hystrix comes at a cost?

Thank you, Stuart. This is a useful rule that I'll try to remember: "Clojure makes it easier to write programs which manage their state correctly. Hystrix makes it easier to write programs which manage side-effect-heavy libraries correctly." On Friday, July 24, 2015 at 2:36:28 PM UTC-4, Stu

Re: Using Hystrix comes at a cost?

Hi Lawrence, I think Clojure's concurrency primitives are more narrowly scoped than that. Clojure's most significant concurrency features (Atoms, Refs, Vars, Agents) are mostly about managing changes to *shared, mutable state* via pure functions. Hystrix is about managing code with unpredictabl

Re: [ANN] Replete ClojureScript REPL iOS app available

It was approved as is. > Out of curiosity, how painful/painless was the process of getting it accepted > into the app store? I've heard that Apple is pretty sensitive about letting > anything in that does any kind of evaluation of arbitrary code. -- You received this message because you are s

Re: [ANN] Replete ClojureScript REPL iOS app available

On Monday, July 20, 2015 at 4:28:51 PM UTC-5, Mike Fikes wrote: > Replete 1.0 is now in the App Store > > > http://blog.fikesfarm.com/posts/2015-07-20-ios-clojurescript-repl-available-in-app-store.html That's incredibly cool! There don't seem to be many open source apps for the iOS platform,

Using Hystrix comes at a cost?

I find this very interesting: http://blog.josephwilk.net/clojure/building-clojure-services-at-scale.html "[Using Hystrix comes at a cost:] We cannot use Clojure’s concurrency primitives (futures/promises/agents)." That is fascinating to think that at some point Clojure's concurrency primitive

Re: clojure core eval appears recursive?

Ah! Special form! Got it! Thank you! >From the fourth paragraph: "If the second operand is a list, or args are supplied, it is taken to be a method call. The first element of the list must be a simple symbol, and the name of the method is the name of the symbol. ..." That was bugging me. A

Re: clojure core eval appears recursive?

eval isn't calling itself, it's calling the method Compiler#eval. (defn eval ...) binds the function to a var named eval, but (. clojure.lang.Compiler (eval form)) is invoking a static method. See the dot special form docs .

clojure core eval appears recursive?

I am looking at the source for clojure's core eval function. It appears to recursively call itself. Is the eval used to call a method on compiler not the same eval? How is this not infinitely recursive? Is something lazy here? Links: * Clojure eval https://github.com/clojure/clojure/blob/b

Re: Best Practice on loading namespaces

Hi Keegan. I’m not sure I would call them abstractions (as they are pretty opaque), I would say they are more about one-thing-to-do-one-thing :-). I do agree that the level of boilerplate code (which I think is actually what you are referring to) has echoes of Enterprise Java. I wouldn’t be at