yw @richiardiandrea :) are you using the clairvoyant tracing macros too ? about 95% of the complexity in my macros is making them work with clairvoyant...

@mccraigmccraig: clairvoyant looks interesting. Why is to so important to you? Any thoughts on https://github.com/philoskim/debux ?

@pesterhazy: just 'cos along with https://github.com/Day8/re-frame-tracer and https://github.com/Day8/re-frame/wiki/Debugging it gives you a very clear insight into exactly what is happening in your re-frame app... i haven't looked at debux

cool

a quick look at debux @pesterhazy and it looks similar to clairvoyant... my short-form re-frame macros would probably need similar support (i.e. expand re-frame reaction/regsub/reghandler forms to standard fn forms before the trace macros get hold of them)... you could very easily adapt my macros to debux if that is the case

I sometimes have subscriptions where one of the parameter is itself a subscription or a reaction, like so :

(let [some-data (subscribe [:data/subdata @depends-on-this])] .... )

(let [some-data (reaction @(subscribe [:data/subdata @depends-on-this]))] .... )

@carkh: look up dynamic subscriptions

You'll end up with:

(let [some-data (subscribe [:data/subdata] [depends-on-this]) .... )

ahh i remember reading this, then promptly forgetting about it ! thanks !

@mccraigmccraig: haven't gotten to the part yet (today)...ideally you want need to wrap your handlers anymore, just enable/disable tracing...is it like this already? I will check and report

@richiardiandrea: you still wrap ... and you need to use the versions of the wrapping macros from my macros

@mccraigmccraig Ok yeah I think what I had in mind is more a macro around ns...or...add meta to the ns...would it be a good idea to trace everything? Maybe yes if your handlers/subs/views are not huge and you are organizing code in panels...I guess