This page is not created by, affiliated with, or supported by Slack Technologies, Inc.
2022-06-18
Channels
- # aws (21)
- # babashka (32)
- # babashka-sci-dev (3)
- # beginners (17)
- # biff (1)
- # calva (8)
- # clj-kondo (1)
- # cljfx (8)
- # cljs-dev (3)
- # clojure (13)
- # clojure-belgium (1)
- # clojure-europe (16)
- # clojure-losangeles (2)
- # clojure-norway (6)
- # clojurescript (11)
- # conjure (1)
- # data-science (1)
- # fulcro (2)
- # gratitude (5)
- # helix (1)
- # joyride (3)
- # malli (14)
- # nbb (4)
- # off-topic (11)
- # other-languages (10)
- # polylith (4)
- # re-frame (2)
- # sci (3)
- # shadow-cljs (20)
- # spacemacs (3)
- # tools-deps (1)
- # vim (4)
Does command refresh all namespaces write output somewhere? Can’t find any information on whether it is ran successfully or not
Dear Calva-friends. I got reminded about Zazzle and decided to put up some Calva merch there as well. See https://calva.io/merch/ There is Joyride merch there as welll. If you buy something there and it is your first Zazzle purchase, please consider using my invite link: https://refer.zazzlereferral.com/pez0 It will give me credits on Zazzle so that I can buy stuff. 😃
I’m constantly making changes and scrambling to rich comments to evaluate things. For web apps i make the change, update the router then go to the rich comments. 1. Is there a way to minimize the back and forth or a better way? 2. Do you keep rich comments in every namespace or in just one file?
I keep rich comments for the thing I am working on just below the top level form I am working on. When there is a Rich comment below the current top level form Calva's command Calva: Add Rich Comment , will jump there instead of creating a new one. It is not perfect, but the workflow gets something like:
1. Make changes
2. Add Rich comment ctrl+alt+r c
3. Test changes
4. Jump back to top level form with Cursor Undo cmd+u (often several times, depending)
I have RCFs all over my codebase. Many functions have a small RCF below them with either a call to the function -- as a sanity check -- or various small fragments that I wrote and evaluated as I was building the function up. Sometimes I delete those RCFs, if they really add no value to maintenance, but often I end up leaving them in the codebase -- as much for "future me" as anybody else.
While I'm developing code, I tend to start it all off in an RCF and build things up from there, eventually copying the finished functions above the RCF into "real" code. I rely on the REPL and evaluating forms all the time and I run tests inside my editor via the REPL as well (I have a hot key bound to a snippet that runs the tests associated with the current ns -- so when I'm editing foo.bar, I can just hit a hot key and it finds foo.bar-test and runs the tests in it, without needing to switch to the test ns).
I might use f12 to go through a chain of definitions and alt+leftarrow to come back to where I started, while I'm thinking about the next steps with my code, but mostly I stay in a single file at a time when working on stuff.
Adding to what Sean wrote, for now here we don’t have unit tests in a separate file, but some of our rich comments under some top-level forms are “hyperfiddled”. So instead of being
(comment
... ; => expected)(rcf/tests
... := expected)
1