Has anyone used core.async with graalvm?

yes

https://github.com/borkdude/babashka/#async

^ @eraserhd

nice!

I found this earlier today, and I think it just made like three of my projects easier: https://github.com/cognitect-labs/clj9p

interesting find

how does that relate to core.async?

The server bit of it (at least) uses core.async.

fwiw I've only used parts of core.async in babashka, I skipped the go macro because that was .. challenging

so all the double exclamation mark stuff works

neat

I wonder what I could do with babashka.

it's designed to replace (parts of) bash scripts / expressions

when windows support for graal improves enough i think it could be used as a cross-platform scripting option

I've been stuck on bash forever, and I thought about scheme shell recently. That caused me to look at my .bash_history, and I found that 70% of my history is invoking git. Fully 5% is mispelling "git status".

Which led me to closh: https://github.com/dundalek/closh

I haven't switched yet, but I'm pondering this.

closh is currently trying to use sci (which is the fundamental lib powering babashka) to get to native using GraalVM, but it's not there yet

with babashka I've taken a different approach than closh, but the spirit is similar: we want to use Clojure where bash is confusing

you can read the babashka rationale how it differs from closh, planck, etc. or join #babashka to discuss

Not better, just different. E.g. I don't believe most people are going to replace the existing bash shells with something else.

i think ms is aiming to get folks to adopt powershell core

this is getting off-topic but if you don't already know bash and it turns out there is some cross-platform shell-script like thing you can use that isn't as hard to understand, i think increasingly, the choice is not necessarily in favor of bash. as far as wide-spread use is concerned, i doubt a lispy thing would gain much ground, but for clojure-using folks, things like closh, babashka, joker, etc. are going to look much more attractive than bash or powershell core. also these clojury options will likely be an interesting entry point for learning clojury things.

yes, it's made for Clojure people who use bash, like myself 🙂

there are subtle nuances in bash that often trip me up, I almost reached for babashka (or pure clojure) a few times when writing the clj-graal-docs 1472 patcher script.

actually I am still tempted to rewrite it, just to feel the difference, but that will happen later if at all.

i think i used up my subtle nuance quota 🙂