This page is not created by, affiliated with, or supported by Slack Technologies, Inc.
2019-05-24
Channels
- # beginners (100)
- # calva (11)
- # cider (17)
- # clj-kondo (2)
- # cljdoc (66)
- # cljs-dev (54)
- # clojure (77)
- # clojure-czech (1)
- # clojure-dev (42)
- # clojure-europe (3)
- # clojure-italy (8)
- # clojure-nl (17)
- # clojure-spec (12)
- # clojure-uk (41)
- # clojurescript (68)
- # cursive (8)
- # datomic (15)
- # emacs (9)
- # expound (3)
- # fulcro (14)
- # garden (3)
- # graphql (2)
- # hoplon (2)
- # lein-figwheel (4)
- # leiningen (4)
- # off-topic (22)
- # onyx (8)
- # parinfer (2)
- # planck (1)
- # re-frame (5)
- # reagent (55)
- # reitit (3)
- # remote-jobs (8)
- # shadow-cljs (35)
- # spacemacs (23)
- # sql (3)
- # tools-deps (32)
- # unrepl (8)
- # vim (25)
- # yada (5)
i use “run on the JVM, run in Docker”
maybe because it feels like i can go inside a docker image (via ssh or cli) and not so much in the jvm. Just rationalizing here, never thought about it too much
doesn't sound wrong
since you are actually running it with docker and not deamonizing it, "with" is probably a better choice (given https://github.com/borkdude/clj-kondo/blob/docker/doc/docker.md#docker)
I'd say "run on the JVM or with Docker", or, alternatively, "in a Docker container".
@flowthing right. for context: https://github.com/borkdude/clj-kondo/#running-with-the-jvm
the links are below each other, I just changed it to be the same, but “on” does sound better with the JVM…
I have a vague memory of reading about a programming book that taught PL theory and design, eventually working towards the implementation of an APL-like language. Does anyone know what book this might be?
@afoltzm Are you thinking about Iverson's book about APL? https://www.amazon.com/Programming-Language-Kenneth-Iverson/dp/0471430145
No, I think the book I'm thinking of is more contemporary, and uses a more restricted syntax than APL.
There's a fair bit of math and theory in that.
No, I think the book I'm thinking of is more contemporary, and uses a more restricted syntax than APL.
Over on Facebook, I was just saying, "There was recently a discussion on Clojurians Slack about the Python mess with 2. vs. 3. . I felt thankful that Clojure's benevolent dictator for life shares my monolithic opinions."
@ericcervin Back in 2013, I attended PyCon (because it was local and therefore cheap enough to attend out of my own pocket). We weren't using Python for anything at work, but I kept hearing good things about it so I figured I'd do an evaluation and see whether it was worth switching our "build scripts" etc over to Python. Great community, fascinating talks at the conference. I loved a lot of the Python 3 stuff they were talking about. Came back to work really quite pumped to spike on it... and then realized quite a bit of our data center infrastructure was solidly locked into Python 2.7 and getting 3 on everything would be quite major 😞 So I just abandoned the idea of switching. I keep thinking I ought to take another look at Python 3 adoption but I get the impression not much has changed in 5+ years...
It's a madness. I wrote 2.7 at my last job, but once I left there I decided to go all in on 3.0 . Fortunately I'm never maintaining more than a small amount of Python that glues things together.
I use several projects with a little bit of Python 2.7 code in them, and about once per month create a fresh Linux VM to test the install scripts with the latest versions of those projects. I noticed about 3 months ago a new warning message, I think from the 'pip' command, that support for bug fixes in Python 2.7 is ending 2020-Jan-01. I am guessing that there will be support from people other than the Python core dev team for minor bug fixes/enhancements to Python 2.7 after that date, given the number of projects still using Python 2. This after 2020 ending date for Python 2.7 support was announced in 2015, I think? I don't follow Python enough to know the history there.