Fork me on GitHub

@joaohgomes Sorry, I missed your question earlier - if that doesn’t get picked up, try refreshing your project in either the lein or deps toolwindow.


Hey, thanks… I already tried that to no avail 😞. Any other tip?


Downgrading to 2018.3 fixed everything after refreshing project in deps tool window. 😛 Thanks!


Thank you for that post with the links to the issues in YT. I thought I was going crazy.


My repl-input is gone; how can i convince intelliJ to show it again 😅 ?


doubleclicking the bottom bar helped.


Yeah, for some reason that gets totally collapsed sometimes - I don’t know why.


It’s also pretty hard to describe this problem as a google-query 😛


Haha, yeah - I’ve been meaning to put in a check with a popup when it happens


Hi, I've noticed unexpected behaviour on the shadow-cljs repl, when using Cursive with (shadow.cljs.devtools.api/node-repl): macros, such as (time) and side-effects eg (print ) won't produce any output. Has anyone ideas how to fix this?


I'm trying to send a form with defmacro to REPL and all I get is Unable to resolve symbol: defmacro in this context. However, if I copy the form by hand, all works just fine. Is sending a form somehow incompatible with defmacro?

Mark Addleman15:08:47

I get this error if I have forgotten to load the file into the REPL. At a minimum, you'll need to evaluate the ns form


Thanks! That works. But it's still really confusing nonetheless.

Mark Addleman15:08:50

Agreed. I've been using Clojure and Cursive for years and I get bitten by that more often than I'd like. It always takes me a few seconds to figure out what's going on.


There is a setting for having the nREPL load in the ns of your current file by default instead of its own ns, I think that might help you out. Ping me here if you need help finding it.


Oh, thank you! That's an interesting read. A bit funny how 70% of the whole troubleshooting page is devoted to this behavior.


@U0567Q30W From the UX point of view, how do you think - would it make sense to intercept the error and provide that link in case that's what's happening? Or is it too unreasonable and/or unfeasible?


Yes, actually I’ve been meaning to investigate why that’s not already happening.


Hi, I’m a big fan of the show difference-option for =-predicates in tests ( Is there any way to extend the predicates for which this option works? I noticed any assertion will work, as long as the :actual value is in the form of (not (= expected actual)), but that feels kind of like a hack 😅