This page is not created by, affiliated with, or supported by Slack Technologies, Inc.
2021-07-20
Channels
- # announcements (1)
- # babashka (32)
- # beginners (100)
- # cider (43)
- # clj-kondo (4)
- # cljdoc (3)
- # cljs-dev (5)
- # cljsjs (2)
- # cljsrn (22)
- # clojure (170)
- # clojure-australia (27)
- # clojure-europe (25)
- # clojure-nl (3)
- # clojure-uk (76)
- # clojurescript (127)
- # conjure (14)
- # core-matrix (1)
- # cursive (9)
- # datomic (6)
- # defnpodcast (1)
- # emacs (32)
- # events (1)
- # expound (77)
- # fulcro (30)
- # graalvm (21)
- # graalvm-mobile (30)
- # helix (4)
- # honeysql (1)
- # hyperfiddle (1)
- # jackdaw (8)
- # jobs (6)
- # kaocha (1)
- # leiningen (4)
- # lsp (16)
- # malli (46)
- # meander (4)
- # off-topic (19)
- # pathom (10)
- # podcasts-discuss (1)
- # portal (2)
- # re-frame (7)
- # reagent (2)
- # releases (1)
- # remote-jobs (11)
- # rewrite-clj (8)
- # shadow-cljs (9)
- # tools-deps (243)
- # vim (1)
I replied to the issue, but I think this will be people on Neovim 0.4 and below when 0.5 is now the stable release. The new Conjure release relies on the window border feature by setting a key in a map. The previous version of neovim without this feature throws an error if there's an extra key in the map 🙃
So the path right now is use the previous version of Conjure or use the latest version of Neovim until I get a chance to push out a compatibility fix.
The fix: Don't insert the "border" key in log.fnl
if the conjure#log#hud#border
option is "none".
Since upgrade to 0.5 is (in 99% of the cases seamless) are you considering locking conjure to work with only 0.5.*?
Sorry if this already been discussed
Not right now, but if I had to rely on some features that just aren't optional then maybe? But I don't see that happening, if I can make things backwards compatible I should for now really. But yeah, upgrading to 0.5 should be completely fine and easy for everyone unless there's some weird restrictions on some platforms.
Agree, out of curiosity, how the backwards compatibility impacts the code quality and developer experience? I never did something like this, but looks very hard to making new features thinking about backwards compatibility.
Depends on the feature, if I required treesitter for all form selection and required it for some fundamental reason: HARD. Optionally adding borders to windows if you have that feature: EASY. It's not that bad really, maybe years of supporting 10s of versions of web browsers prepared me for feature detection 😅
I just dropped the ball on this one because I was in a hurry and merged a PR that added that code
I also didn't realise an extra key in a map would throw an error, that's kinda annoying.
hahaha
Oh the browser hell, I have some bad memories about it, thanks for your explanation. Yeah maybe you could do some polls about what version of nvim people are using and when you reach a good percentage that would be a good moment to drop 0.4 support or something like that.