Thanks for the input Christophe & Laurent.
I'm definitely less inclined to port it if the consensus is that the
code is unmaintainable and slated for deprecation.
In the meantime I was able to de-lightable-ize Paredit-Plus, which
supports a few more crucial commands than Subpar and will let me get
by a little longer.
Hope that the sjacket strategy works out!
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:53 AM, Laurent PETIT <laurent.pe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
>
> 2014-04-02 11:33 GMT+02:00 Christophe Grand <christo...@cgrand.net>:
>
>> Hi Kovas,
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 3:26 AM, kovas boguta <kovas.bog...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Looking through the source for parsley & paredit.clj, I'm halfway
>>> convinced that maybe its not so hard to port these to clojurescript.
>>>
>>> Anyone have input in either direction?
>>
>>
>> We (Laurent and me) are planning an overhaul of paredit.clj.
>
>
> I confirm what Christophe says.
>
> Paredit.clj does the job currently, but it's a nightmare to maintain / add
> new features to it, mainly because the primitive it uses are too low level.
>
> We have indeed plans with Christophe to eventually replace it with sjacket.
> Since it's not possible and would be very inefficient to rewrite everything
> and wait for being ready, we will probably introduce the new solution in
> parallel to the current one, and it could start adding value by implementing
> new features bound to new commands / key bindings.
> This would be a proof of concept that it's working in CCW, would prevent the
> "big bang" effect of replacing an implementation by another.
> And then, at their own pace, old features of paredit.clj could be replaced
> with features in sjacket, either eagerly or reactively for "fixing" bugs.
>
> That's not to say that there's no value in trying to port
> parsley+paredit.clj "as is" technically to ClojureScript. As I said, if you
> can live with its imperfections, paredit.clj currently does the job.
>
> I just don't know what to expect in terms of performance? (Christophe might
> have a better idea on this subject)
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Most of the Java interop seems to be
>>> 1. ArrayList (in parsley)
>>> 2. Various string methods (.endsWith, .indexOf, etc)
>>> 3. Regular expressions
>>>
>>> Is there something I'm missing that would require structural change?
>>
>>
>> Apart from the fact that I'm far from being satisfied by the state of
>> parsley, none I can think of.
>>
>> <rant>
>> Rant on the state of parsley;
>> 1/ what I think is mostly right with it: true total incremental lexerless
>> parsing updating multiple views ("functional trees").
>> 2/ what I think is wrong with it: its expressive power -- switching to
>> more lookahead would be doable but a meager gain for a sizeable effort --
>> I'd like to bring incrementalism to a parser capable of handling any CFG but
>> I fail to find a sensible[1] way to make a CFG-class parser to be total
>> while not realizing most of the parse forrest
>>
>> [1] one that nearly minimize the ignored input length and is stateless (a
>> parsing from scratch should return the same ignored spans)
>> </rant>
>>
>> Christophe
>> --
>> On Clojure http://clj-me.cgrand.net/
>> Clojure Programming http://clojurebook.com
>> Training, Consulting & Contracting http://lambdanext.eu/
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> Groups "Clojure" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
>> Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with
>> your first post.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
>> ---
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Clojure" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Clojure" group.
> To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
> Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your
> first post.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Clojure" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Clojure" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
