This page is not created by, affiliated with, or supported by Slack Technologies, Inc.
2016-01-07
Channels
- # admin-announcements (69)
- # alda (8)
- # beginners (6)
- # boot (182)
- # cider (10)
- # cljs-dev (24)
- # cljsrn (17)
- # clojars (70)
- # clojure (142)
- # clojure-brasil (5)
- # clojure-czech (1)
- # clojure-poland (4)
- # clojure-russia (96)
- # clojurescript (115)
- # community-development (37)
- # component (6)
- # cursive (11)
- # datomic (32)
- # events (4)
- # funcool (6)
- # hoplon (17)
- # ldnclj (10)
- # lein-figwheel (24)
- # mount (12)
- # om (141)
- # onyx (7)
- # parinfer (48)
- # re-frame (24)
- # reagent (31)
I ask because of http://dev.clojure.org/jira/browse/CLJS-359
which seems to be related. The first possible solution needed to have the 20 array-seq but eventually another solution showed up that did not require that
@kamn ah yeah those are still relevant - of course it’s an edge case that few people hit but I would like to see them addressed
It seems that when targeting nodejs and using advanced optimizations, command line arguments are not passed to the main function (http://stackoverflow.com/questions/34641241/clojurescript-nodejs-program-wont-accept-console-arguments). The reason is that process.argv
is not included in the nodejs externs (https://github.com/clojure/clojurescript/blob/master/src/main/cljs/cljs/nodejs_externs.js), but we are using it in here: https://github.com/clojure/clojurescript/blob/master/src/main/cljs/cljs/nodejscli.cljs#L23. Should process.argv = {}
be added to the node externs file or should users create their own externs file for this case?
@maria I think supporting the very basics makes sense - but we should try to communicate to users that the Node.js + advanced compilation combo isn’t really a recommended path. My suspicion is that the externs were there because in the early days it was not clear how much of a runtime performance benefit advanced gave.
I went ahead an updated the Node.js bits of Quick Start, hopefully that catches some people before they go down the wrong path
I’m thinking about cutting a new release tomorrow - if you have time to test master that would be great
@dnolen I can test using replumb too
which release number? we also have outstanding tests we could try for some issue https://github.com/ScalaConsultants/replumb/labels/solved-upstream (just showing you the list)
@richiardiandrea: no release, you need to use ClojureScript from master by running ./script/build
from the repo
ah ok, I read you wanted to release, yes I contributed a patch + tests I am familiar with the process 😄 I will test against master
@richiardiandrea: May occur for Replumb as well, there is a breaking change wrt CLJS-1425 (`cljs.js/eval` callback value)
Ok will check and change that