Thank you Niels,
вторник, 1 июля 2014 г., 15:10:42 UTC+4 пользователь Niels van Klaveren
написал:
A new option for test purposes is included in JDK 1.7.0_40 and up and is
called Java Mission Control. It is located in the JDK as /bin/jmc.exe.
Is this tool only for Windows?
With it you
Have you tried upgrading leiningen to the latest version? I don't think you
can deploy from old versions, at least that's been a problem for me in the
past.
On 2 Jul 2014 20:55, Jacob Goodson submissionfight...@gmx.com wrote:
I have been deploying the same project to clojars for quite a while
No, it is not. At least it is available on Mac too.
On Thursday, July 3, 2014 9:25:44 AM UTC+2, ru wrote:
Thank you Niels,
вторник, 1 июля 2014 г., 15:10:42 UTC+4 пользователь Niels van Klaveren
написал:
A new option for test purposes is included in JDK 1.7.0_40 and up and is
called
YourKit works well. I've heard good things about JVisualVM, but don't have
experience using it.
On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 12:31 AM, Jakub Holy jakub.h...@iterate.no wrote:
No, it is not. At least it is available on Mac too.
On Thursday, July 3, 2014 9:25:44 AM UTC+2, ru wrote:
Thank you
Woops, posting too late... I typed JVisualVM, but meant to say Java Mission
Control.
On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 1:10 AM, Alex Baranosky
alexander.barano...@gmail.com wrote:
YourKit works well. I've heard good things about JVisualVM, but don't have
experience using it.
On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at
No, also for Oracle JVM on Linux, and 64 bit Mac OS X
--
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
Hi
I have been trying to build a test.check generator for a multi map, without
much success.
I have a generator which generates ordinary maps:
(def ord-gen
(gen/fmap (partial zipmap [:port :instr :qty])
(gen/tuple (gen/not-empty gen/string-alpha-numeric)
Even on the latest version (2.4.0), I've experienced problems in the last
three weeks. I believe they've coincided with the site redesign, but they
may not be related. I sometimes get Read timed out when uploading an
artifact. Since deployments aren't atomic, the library or template will be
Hi Conrad,
Not sure if this will meet your needs but I just tried using
humane-test-output with lein-test-refresh and had auto-running of tests
with a nice diff output. If humane-test-output gives you the output you are
looking for I'd imagine it works with prism as well.
humane-test-output:
Hi,
I've taken a stab at what I think you want:
(def gen-cache
(gen/fmap
#(reduce (fn [r m] (merge-with merge r m)) {} %)
(gen/vector (gen/fmap
(fn [o]
(let [{:keys [port instr] :as ord} o]
(assoc-in {} [port instr] ord)))
Hello Timothy,
Thank you for the response. I've given much thought to your examples and it
quickly became clear how relevant defprotocol and deftype is. I had no idea
Clojure provided a mechanism for strongly typed structures like that. I've
started re-designing my library around this concept
There's one other construct that may help you here:
(defrecord Point [x y]
(scale [this amount]
(assoc this :x (* x amount) :y (* y amount
defrecord acts much like deftype, but creates a new copy of the record via
assoc, you can also do stuff like:
(:x (-Point 10 11))
defrecord
Hi Atamert,
Here's a gist with the example code:
https://gist.github.com/neapel/4e502a14e3738b709672
I tried replacing a closure with a dynamically built and evaluated
metafunction but discovered that it was actually slower.
If evaluating code during run is slower than AOT compiling it, it
What clojure tools should I be considering for doing syntax tree
manipulations? In general, I'm recursively matching patterns in subtrees
and rewriting them. The patterns are usually more complex than, say,
core.match patterns (e.g. match subtree having vector that contains term,
and split the
You're going down a rabbit hole here. Evaluating forms at runtime will
always result in a slower execution time than a function that doesn't
evaluate a form at runtime.
On Thursday, July 3, 2014 11:55:02 AM UTC-4, Pascal Germroth wrote:
Hi Atamert,
Here's a gist with the example code:
I'm using ring.middleware.force-reload to always reload the namespaces that
reference my enlive templates. (only in dev, of course)
https://github.com/citizenparker/ring-middleware-force-reload
Hope that helps,
Curtis
On Wednesday, July 2, 2014 3:14:16 PM UTC-5, Sven Richter wrote:
Hi,
If I understand your question correctly, you want to manipulate a deeply
nested tree-like data structure, right? If that's correct, then perhaps a
combination of clojure.zip and multimethods will suit your needs. Zippers
provide a facility to transform (possibly) deeply nested immutable data
Zippers, clojure core functions work great if you don't need to query up
the tree as well as down.
For situations where I want pattern-matching like semantics, with the
ability to do arbitrary queries, I've reached for core.logic and/or
Datomic. It's pretty trivial to have some code that turns a
You may want to take a look at seqexp https://github.com/cgrand/seqexp and
zip-visit https://github.com/akhudek/zip-visit.
- James
On 3 July 2014 17:12, Brian Craft craft.br...@gmail.com wrote:
What clojure tools should I be considering for doing syntax tree
manipulations? In general, I'm
On Thursday, July 3, 2014 5:19:56 PM UTC+1, adrian...@mail.yu.edu wrote:
You're going down a rabbit hole here. Evaluating forms at runtime will
always result in a slower execution time than a function that doesn't
evaluate a form at runtime.
I thought that was the whole point of
I'm reading Cloujure in Action as an introduction to Clojure and,
although, I understand a keyword can be used as a function I don't
understand the difference between:
(ns org.currylogic.damages.http.expenses
(:require [clojure.data.json :as json-lib]
I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here. :( Your example is
simply benchmarking the same bit of code in each form. Why would evaluating
one explicitly affect that benchmark? Your original example called eval in
the body of the functions that you're benchmarking. That is where the
The ns form is a macro that takes a special syntax and always uses the
keyword form, as you have in your first example. Your second example is
incorrect; I'd be surprised if it even ran.
The reason for this is to make it clear that you're not executing the
require function directly, but instead
Hi Reid
Yes that's exactly what I was trying to achieve. Thank you very much.
As for the multi-maps. I was simply using the term incorrectly, sorry for
the confusion.
Thanks once again
On Thursday, 3 July 2014 16:44:29 UTC+2, Reid Draper wrote:
Hi,
I've taken a stab at what I think you
On Thursday, July 3, 2014 6:15:32 PM UTC+1, adrian...@mail.yu.edu wrote:
I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here. :( Your example is
simply benchmarking the same bit of code in each form. Why would evaluating
one explicitly affect that benchmark? Your original example called eval
On 03/07/2014 18:36, James Reeves wrote:
The reason for this is to make it clear that you're not executing the
require function directly, but instead passing options to the ns form.
I don't understand not executing the require function directly.
I've also seen the when function called as
No I'm benchmarking the functions returned by f1-4.
Where did I say different?
In any event, I'm trying to help you understand why your benchmarking
results are not aligning with your expectations and assumptions about the
code you wrote.
I would really like to help you gain a greater
I believe you might have seen :when in the binding vector of either a for
or deseq form. Their special usage is documented
here: http://clojure.github.io/clojure/clojure.core-api.html#clojure.core/for
In any event, James explained the distinction quite well. Macros are often
used to create
Keywords can be used as a function with a map, so the keyword will search
for itself in the map. Take a look at
http://clojure.org/data_structures#Data%20Structures-Keywords
In the case of the ns form, as James pointed out, what is happening is
not a function call. ns is a macro and as such that
On Thursday, July 3, 2014 7:27:24 PM UTC+1, adrian...@mail.yu.edu wrote:
No I'm benchmarking the functions returned by f1-4.
Where did I say different?
I understood Your original example called eval in the body of the
functions that you're benchmarking as meaning I was running something
One thing to note is that while it's true keywords can be used as
functions they can only really do one thing, which is get values from
maps. That is to say, the keyword-function :foo is equivalent to the
function #(get % foo). The function :foo has no relationship with the
function foo, if it
New to Clojure (find it fascinating so far, in large part due to watching
approximately a billion Rich Hickey vids on YouTube). I had a similar
question and figured I just resurrect this thread on it.
My naive thought was that when you (re)def a variable, you aren't actually
copying over the
In your example, [1 2 3 4 5] allocates and initializes a vector with the 5
elements 1 2 3 4 5.
The first (def my-vec ...) also allocates a Var, and makes it 'point' at
the vector [1 2 3 4 5].
When you do (assoc my-vec 2 hello), it looks up the current value pointed
at by my-vec, which is the
On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 11:55 PM, Pascal Germroth funkyco...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi Atamert,
Here's a gist with the example code:
https://gist.github.com/neapel/4e502a14e3738b709672
I tried replacing a closure with a dynamically built and evaluated
metafunction but discovered that it was
34 matches
Mail list logo
