Re: Thoughts on clojure.spec

Right, and I don't think the "this is closed we shouldn't discuss it anymore" line is great when people are advocating for a piece of functionality. I understand Alex doesn't want endless threads bikeshedding basically arbitrary naming choices, but that's not the same as people making simple po

RE: Thoughts on clojure.spec

Well, both Alex and Rich have said the change is deliberate and there are no plans to change that decision – and Rich talked about ways you can add return value testing manually based on specs (if you want, but he won’t help you) – so it seems like a “closed” topic to me? (and Alex has shut down

Re: Thoughts on clojure.spec

I think that was an explanation of why it's not particularly valuable in unit tests, but not really an explanation of why it wouldn't be useful in lower environments or canary boxes in distributed deployments. This thread has also touched on how not everything is gen-testable because of complex

Re: Thoughts on clojure.spec

Rich has given a pretty good explanation of why this was removed elsewhere. And in this thread, a week ago, he explained again why gen-testing :ret and :fn specs was the better approach. Sean Corfield -- (970) FOR-SEAN -- (904) 302-SEAN An Architect's View -- http://corfield.org/ "If you're

Re: Thoughts on clojure.spec

Here's the commit removing that aspect of instrument-all. Not a big change. https://github.com/clojure/clojure/commit/30dd3d8554ff96f1acda7cbe31470d92df2f565a As an aside, I also love the idea of the Clojure community fostering a culture of gen testing each chunk of well defined functionality.

Re: Thoughts on clojure.spec

> Do you find it frustrating that there's no way to turn on instrumentation of function outputs for manual testing? Yes. I've mentioned this elsewhere but I think being able to turn on output checking in lower environments (dev, test, master, staging) is getting extra values from specs basicall

Re: The Language of IoT is Clojure

Very cool... I've been wanting to see Clojure in IoT! On Monday, July 18, 2016 at 7:16:58 AM UTC-7, Gregg Reynolds wrote: > > Hi list, > > The competition phase of the Intel Ultimate Coder Challenge for IoT > drew to a close last Friday. Final > reports are n

Re: Clojure 1.9.0-alpha10: Semantic mismatch: any? vs not-any?

Please, let's end the discussion on this - it's not up for debate. On Monday, July 18, 2016 at 3:28:05 PM UTC-5, Logan Buckley wrote: > > FWIW, I was not aware of `any?` when I read this thread, and I found its > semantics confusing -- I think `anything?` would be much clearer. > `anything?` als

Re: Clojure 1.9.0-alpha10: Semantic mismatch: any? vs not-any?

FWIW, I was not aware of `any?` when I read this thread, and I found its semantics confusing -- I think `anything?` would be much clearer. `anything?` also seems more obviously useful for defining specs (e.g. a function can take _anything_ as an argument). It seems usual in Clojure for scalar p

Re: The Language of IoT is Clojure

Great work! On Monday, July 18, 2016 at 9:16:58 AM UTC-5, Gregg Reynolds wrote: > > Hi list, > > The competition phase of the Intel Ultimate Coder Challenge for IoT > drew to a close last Friday. Final > reports are now online. > > Clojure played a starring rol

The Language of IoT is Clojure

Hi list, The competition phase of the Intel Ultimate Coder Challenge for IoT drew to a close last Friday. Final reports are now online. Clojure played a starring role in my project (Team 2), along with Iotivity . Briefly, I ported Iot

[ANN] Introducing Martian - simplify your Clojure/script HTTP clients

Hi everyone, I'm very excited to introduce *Martian*, a Clojure/script HTTP client wrapper which simplifies HTTP calls without surrendering control to an opaque library. Find it on Github and Clojars now: https://github.com/oliyh/martian It uses Swagger descriptions to name operations,

Re: Good post on remote working

Having worked from home for close to 6 years now I would add: - get an exercise regime. Seriously. The c25K program is great for those would like to become runners. - regularly go to the office, without fail. Once a month at least. - in that office get everybody around the whiteboard. - determi