I will test this to see how does it work with non-bash shells

Works great!

It is mostly a bash command line when on Linux or Mac. No idea how e.g. Fish likes it.

It seems fish doesn't enter into it.

If it does, the pushd; stuff; popd works great

A little while ago, IIRC, you wrote a monograph about Jack-In coping with the distinct and incompatible interface of every build tool. Meanwhile, for my part, at more or less the same time, I mislaid the one-in-a-trillion-trillions combination of project setup, Calva configuration, and VS Code commands to achieve a ClojureScript REPL. It seemed that an idiot-proof "grand unified jack-in" would be a very splendid ideal. And even more splendid if there were either (a) fewer incompatible interfaces than the full transitive matrix of every-build-tool * every CLJS tool, or (b) more modularity of adapters among interfaces, the more efficiently to parcel and share the burdens of interoperability.

We took quite a risk when deciding to support the build tools du jour. But it turns out we did it at a time when the dust was enough settled. I guess there could still show up some build tool that solves things in interestingly enough ways to gain traction and seriously challenge the infrastructure we have. But it doesn’t look that way right now. Did you succeed in achieving your REPL using Jack-in, or did you have to retreat back to manual start?

There is a meaningful flip side of my blunt speech: No matter how confident I seem when I say something, I am always fully open to the possibility I am wrong. So don't think you will get under my skin by pointing out any errors. If I still disagree, I will probably argue a bit. Or in some cases, I might correct myself based on raised incongruities. But when presented with valid arguments against claims I have made, I can easily flip on a dime to incorporate an entirely new perspective; and be grateful for the chance to learn something new in the process. So please have at it if you ever think I am spewing disinformation. Rip my comments apart and correct the record.

Oh, wow. Thanks for writing this, @U90R0EPHA . I shall admit that yes, some of your comments has managed to get under my skin. But knowing this you have just told us, I will reinterpret all comments. It really is not that I don’t appreciate your engagement. I do! Sometimes you have a tendency to second guess others, or at least to express yourself in a way that I have taken as second guessing. But with me, from now on, I will be much farther from taking things you say like that. I apologize for losing my temper in that other thread yesterday. Thanks again. Let’s continue to work together to make Calva the best we can make it!

I also appreciate your engagement in this channel as well as on GitHub. Thanks for taking the time to explain your above thoughts.

This exchange right here is a good example of why the Clojure community is such a good place. Thank you all for leading out with courage and kindness.

Another extension on what I said above is that I have a strong attraction to debate as a method of learning and self-correction. By presenting my view out loud, it becomes open for critique. It tells others where I stand so they don't have to guess. And if we don't agree, this might allow them to meet me closer to where I am. Then by picking apart the claims of others, it forces them to explain things better. Or by trying to incorporate parts of what they say into my own claims, I can reduce the surface area of any disagreement. I realize how easily that can come across as being obstinate. It's usually quite the opposite. I am trying to better understand opposing views by (selfishly perhaps) using the method that works best for me. I think something I could definitely work on here is finding more opportunities for open ended questions, which would give more control back to whoever I'm "arguing" with.

Written communication is a very blunt tool. So much information is not conveyed that we are otherwise relying on being conveyed. At least with me I tend to forget this, my intentions are obvious to me and I forget how not obvious they are to others. IRL a lot of this is compensated for by body language and eye contact. And on top of that it is this problem with that we are all so different. 😃 I now know better how to read your way of communicating, @U90R0EPHA. Still, you’ll make it easier for me if it doesn’t get to where we are almost arguing when we really rather are trying to figure things out together.

Agreed. 😸

> By presenting my view out loud, it becomes open for critique. It tells others where I stand so they don’t have to guess. And if we don’t agree, this might allow them to meet me closer to where I am. I’ve found myself communicating this way at times too, and I try to be more conscious of it now. > I think something I could definitely work on here is finding more opportunities for open ended questions I’ve found this strategy to be effective in the past for myself.

> I’ve found myself communicating this way at times too, and I try to be more conscious of it now. > I try to be conscious of it too. A few years ago, I could have had everyone in the channel absolutely fuming ... and not even noticed there was anything wrong. :rolling_on_the_floor_laughing:

As a bystander, just want to send some hugs and gratitude for the recurring themes in this thread: the introspection and ability to self-correct one's beliefs and behaviors; and the empathy and conviction to always try to find the best in people. It would have been so much easier to do otherwise. I hope I will have the presence of mind to remember these rules myself, next time I am inching towards a heated debate. :hugging_face:

the comments were triggering to me too, I did not appreciate being subscribed to notifications of a back and forth argument and ultimately muted the thread (my thread) @U90R0EPHA you have not asked for feedback, you have only stated that you don't understand why (thus implicitly disclaiming responsibility for your contributions to the failed thread). So I am taking a risk here by giving unsolicited feedback. Here is a mental model for communication that has served me well: https://www.weskao.com/blog/strategy-not-self-expression#:~:text=Strategy%20is%20probably%2010%25%20of,the%20person%20to%20feel%20remorse.. I hope you find it helpful in understanding why the thread failed and at what point exactly the failure occured.

> (thus implicitly disclaiming responsibility for your contributions to the failed thread) > I am explictly claiming full responsibility, with the caveat of trying to explain how the cause is that, in the context of typical expectations for communication, I am essentially "broken". I can do my best to continue improving my communication skills. But I'm not going to suddenly be a different person who communicates like everybody else does. If pez understood some of my differences better before your thread, there's a good chance your thread would not have run off the rails. > you have not asked for feedback > Feedback always welcome. > I hope you find it helpful in understanding why the thread failed and at what point exactly the failure occured. > No. Unfortunately I don't find it helpful. I was not trying to convince anyone to change their behavior. Would you care to explain how this strategy would have fit in?

And @U09K620SG, I should also specifically apologize for ruining your thread. Sorry 🙏:skin-tone-2: