Well, FYI I've figured out you just need to project the variables you
want. Sorry for double-posting.
However I've got no idea about how optimum this is. So please don't
hesitate if you think about any more clever way to use functions in
core.logic :-)
胡軒
```clojure
(let [depart-state {:a {:a 1
My pleasure!
Please consider that the Galaxy memory grid project, which provides
integration out-of-the-box with Quasar/Pulsar actors for networking,
distribution and even migration (but is not by any means the only possible
one), is not considered production-ready yet at this stage even though
Hi Dan,
And, if I understand correctly, what was really happening with the macro
> bar was that in ('+ 2 'u), '+ was looking itself up in 2, not finding
> itself, and so returning the default value 'u. This was the expansion of
> the macro, and so at run time, it was bound to 10.
>
>
exactly,
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 9:03 PM, Matching Socks
wrote:
> Is lein's project mavenry important here? Could you call cljs.compiler
> directly?
>
You mean instead of using 'lein cljsbuild auto'? I can do that but I'm not
sure how to "link" the cljs core lib. Following David Nolen's excellent
hell
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"?
On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 12:08 PM, Gregg Reynolds wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 9:03 PM, Matc
Hi Brian,
Thanks for your kind words and, of course, for midje...I've been using
it for years!
About the AOT issues, i was mainly referring to this:
https://github.com/marick/Midje/issues/274
In addition, where i work we have to package our 'harness-testing'
module separately and not AOT it.
On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 1:28 PM, Timothy Baldridge
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 lang
On Jan 27, 2016 1:57 PM, "Gregg Reynolds" wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 1:28 PM, Timothy Baldridge
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 fil
So a bit of constructive feedback on Fudje, firstly, I like that it's
pretty simple, I can take bits I want and leave bits I don't, so good work
on that.
But I do have a issue with the sweet.clj syntax, and I think it's best
exemplified by the code found in the intro:
(testing "arg-checker in mo
Hi Timothy,
Many thanks for taking the time to look into fudje...It is nowhere near
as mature as midje but I find it pretty neat and a pleasure to work with
so far (apart from the 'multimock' workaround perhaps). Also, many
thanks for your feedback...It seems you have misunderstood the purpose
Hi again Timothy,
I just got what you meant! by DSL you mean the 'free-floating' checkers
right? You mean that you'd prefer to see the checkers as `assert-expr`
extensions so they are recognizable by `is` yes? I'm not entirely
opposed to that but that would mean one `is` per assertion, which s
Thanks for taking the time to reply.
Yes, let me clarify what I mean by DSL. Let's say I in my code somewhere
say:
(println (just 42))
What is printed in my repl is an instance of the JustChecker type. Calling
(just ...) doesn't do anything on its own, it constructs am Abstract Syntax
Tree (AST)
(constantly nil) would work as a Ring handler.
The str function also would work as a Ring handler.
But it might be unclear (in a context where either a Ring handler, or a
function for some other purpose, was acceptable) whether these were
intended as Ring handlers
--
You received this mes
On 27 January 2016 at 05:42, JvJ wrote:
> Is there a way to dynamically check whether or not a given function
> qualifies as a ring handler?
>
Nope. Clojure isn't statically typed, so you can't determine that a
function always returns a value of a particular type.
- James
--
You received this
Based on the way I've been using midje and the way I use clojure.test, I
really appreciate the middle path fudje has chosen. I don't think the DSL
underneath has caused any confusion, and the team I'm working with is
composed of seasoned Clojure programmers who have never used midje before.
Anecdot
(def test-galaxy [{:quad-col 0, :quad-row 0, :sec-row 4, :sec-col 4, :type
:E}
{:quad-col 0, :quad-row 0, :sec-row 4, :sec-col 3, :type
:base}
{:quad-col 3, :quad-row 5, :sec-row 7, :sec-col 5, :type
:star}
{:quad-col 1, :quad-row 3, :s
Hey cycl...@speakeasy.net,
Jay's excellent main point is really about the use of anonymous functions-
that in many cases it's an anti-pattern.
Having a name for every function means that those functions become testable
and that code consuming those functions stays readable.
Another point is that
Great! Thanks all for your explanations.
On Wednesday, January 27, 2016 at 4:33:40 AM UTC-8, gianluca torta wrote:
>
> Hi Dan,
>
>
> And, if I understand correctly, what was really happening with the macro
>> bar was that in ('+ 2 'u), '+ was looking itself up in 2, not finding
>> itself, and so
18 matches
Mail list logo
