Fork me on GitHub

can anyone tell me ETA of 1.9 stable? I already have a piece of code that depends on clojure.spec, unfortunately my team did not approve my PR (bunch of alpha-phobics), that makes it a bit inconvenient for me personally.


not even approximation? before Christmas, 2nd quarter next year etc.?

Alex Miller (Clojure team)00:09:52

I'm sure we will try to hit some milestone before the conj but may just be beta (feature freeze)

Alex Miller (Clojure team)00:09:25

We have a couple other things in flight that we haven't even talked about yet

Alex Miller (Clojure team)00:09:20

We are not currently working towards any concrete deadline though


yeah, ok… I am so excited though. Spec turns out to be a massive feature of the platform. I really like it.


@wagjo yeah, I switched to backport. Worked as a charm.


Are you generally expected to add enough info to s/fdef such that running check on that fn works? Is that considered the “default” state? I’m writing reasonably gnarly generators to make that work, because I have two args with related keys (and if you picked args at random, you’d almost ceratinly end up with garbage)


Hm. I wonder if it’s OK for an fdef’s :args to have a generator that uses the fn being fdef’d (a lot of functions can clearly be run with a “base case” if you will; e.g. if you have something that conjs a bunch of stuff together, you might conj a bit ahead of time and assert that it doesn’t throw away previously conj’d things)


I think so, but with the apparently suggested pattern of fdefing before the defn itself, you run into a compile error; so I’m wondering if I should just declare it and be done with it or what 🙂


FYI, got a weird error when running clojure.spec.test/check + deftest through CIDER (and only CIDER): Might be interesting for upstream to look into since just because CIDER ran into it (or rather; I only ran into it with CIDER) doesn’t mean it’s necessarily CIDER-specific 🙂