This page is not created by, affiliated with, or supported by Slack Technologies, Inc.
2016-06-25
Channels
- # beginners (21)
- # boot (37)
- # cljsjs (1)
- # cljsrn (1)
- # clojure (48)
- # clojure-greece (3)
- # clojure-poland (1)
- # clojure-quebec (4)
- # clojure-spec (40)
- # clojure-uk (1)
- # clojurescript (113)
- # cursive (13)
- # events (3)
- # hoplon (183)
- # jobs (5)
- # off-topic (2)
- # onyx (49)
- # planck (35)
- # re-frame (8)
- # reagent (2)
- # sim-testing (1)
- # specter (4)
- # spirituality-ethics (2)
- # untangled (1)
- # vim (2)
- # yada (1)
Alpha 8 is looking like a great release, based on the commits over the last few days!
Gonna be a big one :)
Any likely ETA @alexmiller ?
Didn't quite finish everything today as expected so prob early next week
rather than complain about having to upgrade fipp for new reader/printer forms, i’ll instead boast: open source contribution opportunities! clojure 1.9 functionality PRs welcome 😉
@alexmiller: small typo in spec guide. the description around function specs uses an int?
predicate instead of integer?
That's correct as is
int? is a new predicate in 1.9 that matches any fixed precision integer
so in particular not bigints?
It was briefly called long?
bigints are the only difference between int?
and integer?
?
interesting
I wonder why that's considered more useful than the other way
well there are a number of constructs in clojure that don't work with idxs bigger than Long/MAX_VALUE
so I'm guessing int?
was provided to cover those use-cases in specs
interesting
(although there are also other constructs that don't work with idx bigger than Integer/MAX_VALUE
like dotimes IIRC?)
ah, I'm thinking of for
and doseq
, they're constrained by Collection.count
returning int
Yes widening from just long to other fixed precision was the reason
In particular to capture int
Conceptually we would prefer if users primarily focus not on the Java types but on integer fixed vs integer arbitrary precision as the main "types"
probably a dumb question, but I’m having to call s/instrument-all every time I make a change to the code or the specs. Is there a way of automating that, or is my workflow simply wrong?
(or is it maybe some nrepl/cider-related thing?)
You shouldn't have to do that
ok, thanks. I’ll try without the cider/nrepl stuff
That was true of the very first release but was fixed early on
I’m using alpha5
Yeah shouldn't be a problem
Must be something in the workflow
ok, thanks. Will try to pinpoint it and raise it in the relevant place
I'm having trouble with a recursive spec on master; not a problem on alpha7: https://www.refheap.com/120803
I scanned the commit messages and didn't see anything suspicious
if I had to guess I'd say it's something to do with coll-of
suggesting that there's ambiguity
That code is brand new and on my plate to test more on Monday morning so I will def look at it
cool, thanks