This page is not created by, affiliated with, or supported by Slack Technologies, Inc.
- # aatree (5)
- # admin-announcements (37)
- # alda (1)
- # announcements (4)
- # architecture (1)
- # aws (3)
- # beginners (82)
- # boot (230)
- # braid-chat (14)
- # cider (48)
- # cljs-dev (8)
- # cljsrn (31)
- # clojars (47)
- # clojure (72)
- # clojure-austin (2)
- # clojure-russia (396)
- # clojurescript (72)
- # community-development (3)
- # component (6)
- # core-async (6)
- # cursive (26)
- # datomic (42)
- # emacs (6)
- # events (35)
- # hoplon (57)
- # immutant (3)
- # jobs (2)
- # jobs-discuss (10)
- # ldnclj (16)
- # luminus (2)
- # off-topic (50)
- # om (181)
- # parinfer (285)
- # proton (68)
- # re-frame (19)
- # reagent (2)
- # ring-swagger (23)
- # yada (36)
@dragoncube: we try to release every couple of months and the next release will probably get the 1.8 version
aww this is what I was thinking of https://github.com/mfikes/planck/issues/153 where 3 segment namespaces were problematic
probably not going to be high priority given there are much more serious problems there to attend to
Anyone know what version of cljs one needs to stop this bug happening: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1138325
@shaunxcode: Yeah, I hacked on
core.async and it is indeed significant. I came away feeling that it is highly likely that it is possible to pull it off, but not without major restructuring. Here is the hacking I was doing, FWIW: https://github.com/mfikes/core.async/tree/self-host
Hmm. Anyone here familiar with how to get clojurescript building properly when using
lein immutant war?
Hey, I am really interested in using Clojure/ClojureScript to make native apps with Om Next but I have one concern
Is it possible to interface with the devices sensors? So if one of my project requirements is to connect with another device over bluetooth, is that something I can do?
@adamkowalski: Just FYI there is also an #C06DT2YSY channel where you could ask this same question and you might get responses there.
> Is it possible to interface with the devices sensors don’t think so unless using phonegap
@clumsyjedi: how specific an answer do you need? IIRC any cljs version from the last couple of months should work.
@clumsyjedi: https://github.com/clojure/clojurescript/commit/d717b4edea074fcfd3e718a6134238ba26f76f82 mentions r3308 r3297 r3291 r3269 r3264 r3263 r3255 r3211 r3208 r3196 r3195 r3191 r3190 r3178 r3169 r3165 r3153 r3149 r3148 r3126 r3123 r3119 r3117 r3115 r3058 r3053 r3030 r2985 r1.7.228 r1.7.189 r1.7.170 r1.7.166 r1.7.145 r1.7.122 r1.7.107 r1.7.58 r1.7.48 r1.7.28 r1.7.10
I have an issue when requiring cljs.js and compiling in
I get the following error in the browser: goog.require could not find: cljs.core$macros
is the performance for protocols vs. multimethods similar to clojure's, i.e. protocols are faster?
@adamkowalski: #C06DT2YSY channel might not help you. but the #C0E1SN0NM one probably will. I didn't have a chance to use RN so far but one of it's features IIRC is the ability to write one's native modules in ObjectiveC/Java and then use them from RN application - for exa,ple https://facebook.github.io/react-native/docs/native-modules-android.html
protocols fns are only slightly slower than regular JS fn calls, multimethods require runtime look up or runtime cache check (not at the VM level) so quite a bit slower than both
@comma: FWIW, back in mid-2012, an addition was added to https://github.com/clojure/clojurescript/wiki/Differences-from-Clojure/fb7f481cbb132741a443ad6973ec4286344ea4de indicating
There is currently no runtime enforcement of arity when calling a
would you be able to confirm that this is for the sake of efficiency then? do you think it’ll change in the future?
@comma: I can’t confirm, unfortunately. It is the case that in many situations, arity warnings will be emitted.
(Also, by the way, that link is very old… it is the point at which the comment was added.)
cljs.user=> (identity 1 2 3) WARNING: Wrong number of args (3) passed to cljs.core/identity at line 1 <cljs repl> 1
@dnolen: You had previously explained the philosophy surrounding oftentimes just warning and not erroring out the compile, and I believe it was related to either an inability to conclusively know an error exists (dynamic, Lisp arguments), or the benefit of seeing subsequent errors. I was trying to dig up the explanation of that philosophy. Will share it if I find it.
(identity 1 2 3) seems like it could just balk and refuse at analysis time. But… what if the user redefined
but single arity functions do not, inlining an arity check yes would be less efficient and complicate the compiler for little benefit in this case
but we already try to cover these cases at compile time when we can and we should just do that
there will still be a gap here for the case where you make a higher order call with such an fn - but we’re just going to leave that be
Here is the bit where @dnolen explained that there is a rule of thumb that the analyzer only blows up when it cannot proceed: http://irc.fikesfarm.com/log/clojurescript/2015-03-22.txt
@mfikes right though to be extra clear that behavior can be customized by setting up your own warning handler
Yes, Jake’s "ClojureScript: Treat Warnings as Errors” covers it: http://jakemccrary.com
@mfikes @dnolen hey I have a quick question for your guys, if I wanted to make an app with Om Next and have it work on iOS and Android would that mean that the whole app must be built with Om Next? Could I instead build part of the application using swift for example and then just incorporate the components I built in Om?
@adamkowalski: You can mix things up. Artem has partially converted bits of his app. Check out #C0E1SN0NM channel.
@adamkowalski: there’s also an #C06DT2YSY channel where more people might be able to share their experience
I’m not actively doing anything related to React Native at the moment other than making sure Om works