Hey, have you enabled syntax highlight for treesitter? https://github.com/lispyclouds/dotfiles/blob/main/nvim/lua/treesitter.lua#L15-L17 it needs to be enabled explicitly

my setup too is lsp/conjure/treesitter

Is this what your highlighting looks like? I have highlight explicitly enabled

right, does your colorscheme supports treesitter maybe?

I'd love to know if there is anything on treesitter that semantic tokens from LSP doesn't have?

https://clojure-lsp.io/features/#semantic-tokens

i remember getting weird highlights when using a colorscheme that doesnt support treesitter

yeah, maybe vim doesn't play well if you enable both, it s worth to test both I think

I wonder if vim uses semantic-tokens, I've seen some strange highlights even after I want back to clojure.vim from treesitter

In some cases just forcing vim to reload file fixes them, so could just be vim not triggering update

I don't remember nvim-lspconfig mentioning anything about highlight

One benefit for neovim-treesitter over lsp would be that neovim can also use treesitter to indent code while you are writing. (Experimental feature) Lsp can format file or range but it needs to be called separately.

yeah, I think semantic tokens from lsp would be the best as it has static analysis and everything to know what each token is and color it properly

but not sure if neovim supports it yet

lol trying other packages for my theme and everything is in cursive 😭

Neovim doesn't support Semantic tokens yet, there is a WIP PR: https://github.com/neovim/neovim/pull/15723

So eventaully got into the weeds and getting closer to a theme. However, my warnings for linting are coming up in green. Does anyone happen to know either where those warnings are coming from (lsp or treesitter) and how to colorize or highlight them? If I could highlight them I could figure out their highlihgt group 😂

the warnings are from lsp, not sure how to colorize it though

Seems there is Diagnostic{Error,Hint,Warn,Info}, thanks!

To make choice even harder, I can say that I've used vim-iced over fireplace since 2020-01 and I like it a lot. I haven't tried to configure Conjure for my use ever so I can't comment on the differences.

Okay, cool. I’ve shaved enough yaks over the past week or so that I’ll chill with Fireplace for now.

I do have some questions about whether I am leveraging this repl/editor thing correctly

There is no right answer. They're both great. Use whichever one you like better! 🙂

*They're all great

I will say that Conjure provides a great out-of-the-box experience, in my opinion. @U38J3881W has taken a lot of care to make it so that it "just works" with no configuration necessary. The only effort on the user's part is just reading through the help text and learning the key bindings, etc.

But are these packages roughly equivalent? so if I start a “new to repl-ing” thread here should it be fireplace-specific or, not?

When I switched from Fireplace, it didn't yet have async eval, which is now has.

Fireplace, Conjure, Iced, and Acid are all equivalent in that they provide REPL/editor integration. Besides that, there are big differences in the features that each provides.

The overall workflow is the same, though: you start an nREPL server, connect to it from your editor, type code into your editor (usually in a comment block) and eval the code to see the results without leaving your editor

right

so far, if I’m working on a function, I eval the definition and then call it with cqc (fireplace command-line editor

but I’m sure I’m missing something, for example if I want to eval some subform in the function that contains a function parameter

I mean how would I go about providing argument and then evaluating a subform, and is that even a typical approach

And I'm pretty used to my way of working with REPL over 9 years so any plugin I choose will need bunch of configuration to fit my use and bindings. So I don't know about default vim-iced setup, and Conjure would need configuration just to fit what I'm used to 🙂

naturally

isn’t that the point of vim, to have things exactly the way you want them 🙂

There isn't much ways around evaling code from defn/let which requires some bindings. Just avoid needing to eval such code. I usually have the function call in a comment or somewhere instead of using comething similar to cqc.

oh yeah, that will work in a comment?

(comment (println "1")) yeah cpp would eval the println depending a bit where your cursor is

ahh (comment) not ;

ok

neat thanks

If you often need to eval only some part of fn or let, maybe it is good place to split it into a separate fn.

is it typical to define functions you’re pretty sure will only ever be called within one other function?

If I'm testing a function that I'm writing, I will sometimes def an example value with the same name as the parameter. For example:

(defn add-five
  [x]
  (+ x 5))

(comment
  (add-five 42))

> is it typical to define functions you’re pretty sure will only ever be called within one other function? I think this is very subjective! It depends on who you ask.

I think more about if the function does something useful by itself, than if the fn is called from multiple places. If you have lots of context, separating a part into own fn might not be that clear as you need many parameters. You can also marks functions private so they aren't used from other namespaces accidentally, if they are "internal implementation".

IMO, it is a good idea to break up larger functions into smaller ones, even if the smaller function is only called in one place, because it can improve the clarity of your code.

Dave, I like it.

+1 for making implementation detail functions private!

juhoteperi is that enforced or just conventional

In Clojure JVM side the private functions can't be called directly, compiler enforces that. They can still be accessed using clojure.test util fn or by accessing the fn through the var (#'foo-ns/private-fn ...). In Cljs compiler will print warning, but the function will get called if you run the resulting JS.

@james.amberger if you want to explore that whole "evaluate expressions in a comment block" workflow they are referred to as "rich comments" in the community https://betweentwoparens.com/blog/rich-comment-blocks/#rich-comment

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qx0-pViyIDU&t=1229s

Thanks all

pretty amazing how quickly people pitch in on here

I held off because I don’t really have any other use for Slack, but

odds of actually using Clojure for something have definitely gone up

Quick note, if you evaluate the whole comment block it returns nil . You want to usually be evaluating the individual expressions within that comment block