Clojurians
#cljs-dev
<
2018-10-30
>

This page is not created by, affiliated with, or supported by Slack Technologies, Inc.

mfikes12:10:01

I was wondering if it is possible to convert (:a x) to (.-a x) if we know x is a record and a is in its basis. An experimental patch for this is in https://dev.clojure.org/jira/browse/CLJS-2950 Would be interested in feedback on whether this might cause any unintended consequences.

dnolen19:10:56

I just finished going through the few obvious spec issues I saw - this is the last one https://dev.clojure.org/jira/browse/CLJS-2728

dnolen19:10:08

needs to be rebased I think? @jbiserkov ^

mfikes20:10:22

I don't recall ever seeing anywhere the minimum version of Clojure required by the ClojureScript compiler being documented on https://clojurescript.org project.clj has 1.10.0-alpha in it script/bootstrap has 1.9.0 in it and script/build uses 1.8.0 The last seems to be the deciding factor, as the code being used in the compiler gets AOT compiled with 1.8.0.

mfikes20:10:18

On a different subject, I ran master trough Canary. A couple of @darwin’s projects might be affected by master (perhaps they just need some tweaks to their tests)

dnolen20:10:30

well only what’s declared in the pom.template.xml matters

dnolen20:10:36

all the other stuff is conveniences

darwin20:10:05

@mfikes for cljs-devtools confirmed, they just need to update some expected test results, I will do that shortly after clojurescript release, for cljs-oops, it looks like previously generated google closure optimized code was incorrect in some cases, newly it emits what I would expect a) before: https://github.com/binaryage/cljs-oops/blob/1c878ff336feff7b3591e8f598c6e7eb169d86a1/test/transcripts/expected/oget_static_goog.js#L65 b) after: https://travis-ci.org/binaryage/cljs-oops/builds/448515341#L850-L853

mfikes20:10:12

Cool! (ClojureScript is currently sitting at zero release-blockers; just wanted to ensure these Canary test failures were OK.)

darwin20:10:14

well, not really incorrect, but confusing (probably)

darwin20:10:48

would have to look how goog.object.get works with only one arg, if it resturns it as-is, then it works technically

dnolen20:10:59

@mfikes I actually think we need to get the spec macro disable thing in

dnolen20:10:10

that’s the only outstanding thing I saw

dnolen20:10:23

I just pulled in all the big spec issues I found, that was the only patch that didn’t apply

mfikes20:10:50

Minimum Clojure version stuff above captured for a potential future tweak to the site: https://github.com/clojure/clojurescript-site/issues/274

mfikes20:10:19

Hah, I had CLJS-2728 applied in a branch and, rebaselining it automatically retained Jordan Biserkov's attribution, so I attached that rebaselined patch to the ticket..