This page is not created by, affiliated with, or supported by Slack Technologies, Inc.
2022-01-26
Channels
- # announcements (1)
- # asami (7)
- # aws (3)
- # babashka (30)
- # beginners (21)
- # calva (48)
- # cider (11)
- # clj-commons (5)
- # clj-kondo (12)
- # cljdoc (5)
- # cljfx (1)
- # cljs-dev (32)
- # cljsrn (4)
- # clojure (218)
- # clojure-europe (88)
- # clojure-nl (11)
- # clojure-uk (31)
- # clojurescript (8)
- # cursive (98)
- # data-science (6)
- # datomic (49)
- # emacs (12)
- # events (4)
- # fulcro (47)
- # graalvm (3)
- # graphql (4)
- # introduce-yourself (5)
- # java (13)
- # juxt (9)
- # lsp (74)
- # meander (3)
- # membrane (4)
- # missionary (31)
- # off-topic (24)
- # pathom (41)
- # portal (4)
- # reagent (3)
- # releases (1)
- # remote-jobs (3)
- # rewrite-clj (4)
- # shadow-cljs (10)
- # slack-help (2)
- # testing (20)
- # tools-deps (43)
I have changes that I think are appropriate for submitting the cljs.math changes. Is there a particular Jira format I should follow to create a ticket for this, please? (e.g. description of problem, alternate approaches, etc?)
the failure was spurious - for things which are about Clojure parity, don't need much expository justification
(unless it's in the domain of things which are hard/strange to implement due to fundamental design choices)
Is there a reason not to call it clojure.math
instead of cljs.math
in CLJS as well? I know that namespace resolution is going to take care of it, but still? Probably a minor thing.
re: REPL testing, @quoll is testing CLJS clojure.math
via Socket REPL which is a neat trick - we should do some basic REPL regression tests following that pattern
you could probably do without the socket stuff and use a non-network stream instead, but I basically copied this from tests I already had for babashka's pREPL and then hooked up the CLJS node REPL instead
I was thinking about changing away from a socket, but I’ve been focused on the tests themselves 🙂
@fogus question about CLJ-2603 - why the .cons
https://github.com/clojure/clojure/commit/3c9307e27479d450e3f1cdf7903458b83ebf52d7#diff-1a4951b5bd2aaff1be2a8bcaaa6cbfa4617ba50584f1d989cb0af88412cdb20dR130 call here? Won't the trailing element be a map anyway?
I think most of the time yes, but this allows non-map-but-conjable things to be in that trailing position also. That's not documented except in code. 🙂
happy to help however i can
I'm not sure that I'm fully understanding your question - are you asking why it's not just passed as is rather than being conj'ed into an empty map?
@alexmiller yes it appears it is copied again into a new map?
yeah, so that's the answer fogus put in the thread
I’ve created https://clojure.atlassian.net/browse/CLJS-3347 and attached a patch. This includes:
• the new namespace
• an abs
function in cljs.core (moved out of math)
• tests executed by a socket prepl