This page is not created by, affiliated with, or supported by Slack Technologies, Inc.
2020-05-22
Channels
- # announcements (2)
- # aws (5)
- # babashka (17)
- # beginners (108)
- # calva (28)
- # chlorine-clover (7)
- # clj-kondo (14)
- # cljs-dev (9)
- # cljsrn (2)
- # clojure (118)
- # clojure-europe (50)
- # clojure-finland (5)
- # clojure-france (15)
- # clojure-italy (9)
- # clojure-nl (14)
- # clojure-spec (11)
- # clojure-uk (43)
- # clojuredesign-podcast (1)
- # clojurescript (35)
- # clojutre (2)
- # clr (3)
- # community-development (6)
- # conjure (9)
- # core-async (41)
- # cursive (7)
- # data-science (7)
- # datomic (11)
- # events (1)
- # figwheel-main (4)
- # fulcro (20)
- # ghostwheel (9)
- # graalvm (18)
- # helix (46)
- # leiningen (14)
- # observability (2)
- # off-topic (23)
- # pathom (4)
- # re-frame (5)
- # reitit (5)
- # rum (2)
- # shadow-cljs (32)
- # spacemacs (8)
- # specter (5)
- # sql (36)
- # timbre (3)
- # vim (15)
- # xtdb (2)
- # yada (2)
Think I'll revert my 2,ee
experiment for now :thinking_face: I think the multiple pair type searching works well though, so you can eval [...]
forms now! To get the "walk this many levels out" or "this many levels in from the root" requires a rewrite of the form extraction code. It's suuuuuper tricky.
Another reason to scrap what I was experimenting with, it would let you use 3,ee
to eval 3 levels out of ONE kind of pair, so if you had [] mixed with () and {} you'd get super inconsistent results.
If anyone has a chance to try out evaluating []
and {}
forms on develop
I'd love to have your feedback! It's working well for me but I'm sure I'm being too careful. If you have some weird combo of different pairs in a huge function, let me know if it still evaluates what you think it should.