This page is not created by, affiliated with, or supported by Slack Technologies, Inc.
2016-12-11
Channels
- # adventofcode (7)
- # aws-lambda (1)
- # beginners (161)
- # cider (19)
- # cljsjs (5)
- # cljsrn (30)
- # clojure (80)
- # clojure-korea (2)
- # clojure-new-zealand (8)
- # clojure-russia (73)
- # clojure-sanfrancisco (1)
- # clojure-spec (14)
- # clojure-uk (12)
- # clojurescript (84)
- # cursive (7)
- # defnpodcast (8)
- # dirac (16)
- # events (2)
- # garden (7)
- # hoplon (178)
- # off-topic (2)
- # om (58)
- # om-next (2)
- # onyx (21)
- # pedestal (1)
- # planck (15)
- # protorepl (32)
- # re-frame (31)
- # untangled (1)
- # yada (5)
That shouldn't be nested like that - there's one bug filed about that and a few other cases we are looking at
@alexmiller the challenge is unqualified symbols for keys
ah, saw @gfredericks already corrected you on that
@alexmiller yeah, I'm familiar with conformers; what I was wanting to do is retain the automagic generator generation, so conformers aren't that. Only the top level is currently symbol-keyed (everything else is sequences of various sorts), so I can easily destructure out for conforming, and manually assoc in the results of generators when doing that.
@bbloom I've been angry about JS[ON] not having symbol literals every single day for ~6 weeks.
@gfredericks looking forward to jections. I actually want two different destructurings coming out of conform, depending on context: JSON -> basically symbolic representation that makes sense for the particular structure I've spec'd, or (2) a completely desugared representation that does things like tag the matching spec on s/or's, flows through the custom destructurings I've put in place via conformers, etc.
wouldn't be surprised if this requires the aforementioned higher-order / spec generics though
I'm just gonna be proud of myself that I wrote my first actual specs today, while y'all are talking the fancy stuff :-)
Hi, I am trying to spec my function... and I have spec'ed the :args and the :ret... but now trying to spec the :fn...
and I have added the example spec (which I know is wrong... but now I don't get any errors ...
:ret and :fn only get checked by doing clojure.spec.test/check or something of that sort
No, not instrumenting