This page is not created by, affiliated with, or supported by Slack Technologies, Inc.
2022-05-22
Channels
- # announcements (4)
- # babashka (10)
- # beginners (25)
- # biff (4)
- # calva (22)
- # clj-on-windows (3)
- # clj-otel (1)
- # clojure (17)
- # clojure-europe (5)
- # clojure-gamedev (2)
- # clojure-norway (1)
- # clojurescript (21)
- # conjure (5)
- # core-async (3)
- # defnpodcast (1)
- # deps-new (8)
- # events (3)
- # graalvm (10)
- # graphql (4)
- # gratitude (2)
- # hyperfiddle (7)
- # introduce-yourself (4)
- # jobs (1)
- # membrane (9)
- # pedestal (5)
- # quil (2)
- # re-frame (7)
- # releases (2)
- # rewrite-clj (14)
- # shadow-cljs (8)
- # tools-deps (5)
That particular interaction is tricky to create. But some kind of search should be entirely possible.
if by "repl history" you mean the output.calva-repl
file, and assuming the file content aren't cleared yet, a workaround would be to navigate the file with [ctrl+f] then simply hit [alt+enter] on the desired result to eval it again... a bit too involved, I know
Hey everyone, I think I found small bug. alt+<up,down> arrow inside map destruction is moving pairs of keys. It treats destruction as map.
For example I can’t move b
to third position in place of c
(let [{:keys [a |b c d]} my-map]
;; ....)
it becomes like this:
(let [{:keys [c d a |b]} my-map]
;; ....)
hey, @U0ETXRFEW. function args works as expected
Thanks. Please file an issue. I don’t quite understand how this happens but I know where to start looking. Let me know if you wanna have a stab at it!
Hy, @U0ETXRFEW. Sorry for late reply, here is issue: https://github.com/BetterThanTomorrow/calva/issues/1737
And btw, it doesn’t happen in function arguments. I guess I found place to look for cursor-doc/parerdit.ts/isInPairsList
Yes, I think you've found the right place. Please update the issue with the clues you find, such as it doesn't happening in function args.
I believe I fixed it. Sent PR https://github.com/BetterThanTomorrow/calva/pull/1738
Thanks! 🙏 So awesome that you do this. I left a comment on the PR about adding tests as well. I should have mentioned those, because I find it particularly rewarding to do this kind of change TDD style.
If you have some time for it some day, @U34K4458X. There are several cases where dragging could be improved, such as in various cond
forms and are
. I think it would involve challenging the naïve way this thing is done today, but I honestly don't know. I just expect it to be non-trivial. 😃
This PR has some info about the room for improvements: https://github.com/BetterThanTomorrow/calva/pull/1698
Ok 🙂 I’ll look into it. Won’t this PR conflict with 1698? https://github.com/BetterThanTomorrow/calva/pull/1606 Seems huge changes.
All Paredit changes conflict with that one., right, @U037TPXKBGS? 😃 There is not much we can do about it. Making fundamental changes is tricky, especially in an open source project, where you might need to pause some changes when payed work and whatever competes.
To be clear. We can't hold other changes to wait for some big (huge, in this case) change to be done. We'll need to accept that friction in the big-change-branch.
Dear Calva friends. https://github.com/BetterThanTomorrow/calva/releases/tag/v2.0.276 • Fix: https://github.com/BetterThanTomorrow/calva/issues/1735, thanks @edward.partenie! • https://github.com/BetterThanTomorrow/calva/issues/1733`vscode.commands.executeCommand()` The promises fix for Paredit is healthy for Calva in general, and aslo necessary for #joyriders who want to tap into Paredit features in particular. The attached, contrived, example was not possible until now.