This page is not created by, affiliated with, or supported by Slack Technologies, Inc.
2020-06-30
Channels
- # announcements (5)
- # beginners (90)
- # cider (15)
- # clara (1)
- # clj-kondo (2)
- # cljs-dev (17)
- # clojars (8)
- # clojure (132)
- # clojure-europe (14)
- # clojure-nl (5)
- # clojure-uk (57)
- # clojurescript (39)
- # code-reviews (44)
- # conjure (6)
- # core-async (6)
- # cursive (20)
- # data-science (1)
- # datomic (13)
- # fulcro (11)
- # graalvm (6)
- # graphql (6)
- # helix (10)
- # joker (2)
- # kaocha (37)
- # leiningen (24)
- # malli (15)
- # off-topic (13)
- # pathom (18)
- # pedestal (14)
- # re-frame (67)
- # reitit (5)
- # ring (13)
- # ring-swagger (4)
- # sci (41)
- # shadow-cljs (33)
- # slack-help (5)
- # spacemacs (1)
- # sql (34)
- # tools-deps (64)
- # vim (171)
- # xtdb (3)
I think that's just due to a detail of the current fulcro server transaction processing implementation. I believe it can be updated to work with multiple mutations of the same name
ahh, yea I'm trying it out and it looks like you're right, it is happening at the pathom level:
(parser {} '[(test-mutations/test-mutation {:param 1}) (test-mutations/test-mutation {:param 2})])
=> #:test-mutations{test-mutation {}}
where the mutation just returns {}
and with a different name:
(parser
{}
'[(test-mutations/test-mutation {:param 1})
(test-mutations/test-mutation2 {:param 2})])
=> #:test-mutations{test-mutation {}, test-mutation2 {}}
not sure what you mean, fulcro is totally ok with multiple ops in transactions
what happens is that you can't have transaction guarantees between the ops, but if they are separated operations its a fine to call as many as you want
you can do [(op {:pathom/as :a}) (op {:pathom/as :b})] ;;=> {:a ... :b ...}
@U051V5LLP