Fork me on GitHub

@mikerod I recently spent a lot of time trying to figure this out. I landed on generating the different files for dev, prod, test, etc. Not optimal, but for now better than duplicating and spreading out.


Some cases could possibly be covered by using CLI options. The docs are a bit vague and spread around, but schema is here


But I think this means that you can EITHER specify a file containing EDN, OR an inline EDN string. Specifying both, where the inline string merges into file contents would be nice


@ingesol thanks. Yeah that makes sense to me. It’s a bit weird to work with it seems indeed.

Brian Abbott19:01:42

How do we has figwheelists view ShadowCLJS? Are they complimentary to each other, seperate but equal or TOTALLY MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE?


My perspective is that they are two tools that provide a similar set of functionality (admittedly, shadow provides more help in the interop department with NPM). Personally, I like Shadow and admire the work thheller is doing, but I have no reason to switch my projects to Shadow at this point in time. Hope this helps answer the question 🙂


I recently switched a project from fw-main to shadow, and had to change how some 3rd packages are used, so now my code is no longer compatible with fw-main. With fw you mostly rely on cljsjs, with shadow you use stuff directly off npm. How a certain package is invoked in both cases may or may not be source compatible.


Just something to be aware of. I still somewhat prefer figwheel-main for the familiarity and easy integration, but objectively shadow does everything that figwheel does equally good or better, and if you need a lot of third party npm packages it is the only thing that really works reliably.


@U07FP7QJ0 That’s a good point!