@UCTNL1JNN case u missed it

Thanks, I really did miss it

Omission: src/main/app/api/read.clj is missing in the template

oh…the book mentions that but it isn’t in the template? Hm…guess I just need to tell you to create it or something

thanks

client :render-mode :keyframe is no longer the template default, is this on purpose ?

yep

never was a good idea I don’t think

under http://book.fulcrologic.com/#_the_function_as_a_child_pattern there's an example with: (:require ["react-motion" :refer [Motion spring]] -- I think this should be (:require ["react-motion" :refer (Motion spring)] to be valid shadow-cljs syntax

About api/read.clj, in addition to creating it and writing queries, should we also require it from another ns to get the queries to stick to the right multi method?

I said that in the book...didn't I? @U06ANT2JK @U7BDL0WKU I was not aware of [] vs () making any diff

I recall hearing it in either the book or videos, but didn’t see it in the new version on first sight

Am going through again

@tony.kay what’s the nubank/workspace equivalent for :inspect-data true?

@U06ANT2JK Fulcro Inspect 🙂

Cool. Is there a config option for Fulcro Inspect to always fully open up the data tree?

I guess searching for something and pressing enter is the quickest

yep

hey sorry about that lol. I think I have all the server stuff figured out, i have pathom mutations/queries working fine on the server. But I also have a few 'client-only' pathom mutations that I've used to abstract/wrap some 3rd party libs' JS APIs. based on some back and forth on the subject a while ago. Granted I have have misunderstood some of it.

;before
(defmutation call-aws-or-something ..
 (action []
  (.callSomething aws-js ...)

; after
(pc/defmutation call-aws-or-something ...)
(def client-parser (p/async-parser ...  call-aws-or-something)..

(defmutation call-aws-or-something ..
 (action []
  (client-parser {}.. } )

You’d probably be better off adding a remote for it, and then making the normal defmutation choose that remote. Pathom, I think, has a fulcro remote wrapper that can act as a remote for a local pathom parser

ah ok gotcha

thanks

@U0DHVSBHA an interesting read https://mauricio.szabo.link/blog/2018/11/10/my-missing-frustration-with-clojurescript/

Yes I read that this morning, I'm guessing the author was also using lein-figwheel (but how can I know, since they never mention which figwheel!). It's a big problem that people often say "figwheel" without specifying which one they mean or even realizing that there's 2 completely different things which fall under that name. Perhaps figwheel-main should have been named something more distinct to avoid this confusion!

Yep. Also dont know about figwheel main, apart from podcasts. That's mainly because can't really find anything wrong with shadow-cljs. :)

Also curious about a comparison :)

for me the biggest downside of shadow-cljs is that it depends on node, meaning for my CI build step I need an image with both clojure AND node installed which is a bit annoying/time consuming. But if you're going to use some node packages in your build anyway then there's no issue there 🙂 Figwheel-main also has nicer REPL tools imho and nicer in-page feedback for warnings/errors, but those might be just a matter of taste.

Would be keen to hear what someone more experienced has to say though as I'm quite new to front-end work!

So, the compiler tweaks the @U05224H0W has done around caching and NPM integration are pretty great. When I want to use something in my production work (and you will want to), it’s usually a very simple matter. With stock cljs I can’t tell you how many times I had to do things like clean the sources in order to get something working again. You’re right. I have not used figwheel-main, but my complaint was never really with figwheel, but more with many of the behaviors of the stock compiler.

Hot code reload is a relatively trivial manner…in cljs it is just websocket push of the new js file…getting the compiler to work well, well, that is a different matter, and with shadow it “just works”…something I appreciate very much.

I’ve updated the book’s comments. I had not intended to make figwheel sound bad…I think Bruce’s stuff is great, and figwheel isn’t even what I’m suggesting you move away from…I was trying to point out that shadow-cljs is a better overall production experience than the stock compiler (even though it uses the stock compiler internally). It is, however, the case that you no longer need figwheel once you’re using shadow.

sorry, i couldn’t resist..

*no criticism implied, nor offence intended…. is this first fulcro meme??