Hey Alex,
Are their any trainings / workshops that will be offered at The Conj this year,
similar to ClojureWest?
Thx,
Marcus
On Jul 15, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Alex Miller wrote:
> Just a quick reminder that the Clojure/conj CFP is open for a couple more
> weeks and we'd like to have your pro
Thanks for checking Steve.
Ambrose
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 5:09 AM, Steve Miner wrote:
> I tried the latest patch from Ambrose for CLJ-1475. Looks good to me.
> Well done.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Clojure" group.
> To post to this
Awesome job, everyone! You guys rock!
Michael
On Saturday, July 26, 2014 3:09:56 PM UTC-6, miner wrote:
>
> I tried the latest patch from Ambrose for CLJ-1475. Looks good to me.
> Well done.
>
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To
I tried the latest patch from Ambrose for CLJ-1475. Looks good to me. Well
done.
--
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 b
While creating a bug report for the clojure-fill-paragaph function in Emacs
I also brought up the topic of changing how alignment works. In short, I
would like to be consistent with how data enclosed in #{ }, { } and [ ] is
indented: We indent the new line so the symbols align with the symbols
On Fri, 25 Jul 2014, Richard Barker wrote:
> Using partition-by will give you a lazy sequence.
>
> (defn only-keep-unique-ids [ids]
> (map first (partition-by #(get-form-id-without-timestamp %) ids)))
This will only work if all entries with the same calculated key are
contiguous.
user> (defn
I find the naming a bit misleading: The fn does not keep-unique-ids, but
makes some ids unique by excluding other ids that are duplicates.
On Friday, July 25, 2014 11:32:43 PM UTC+2, Christopher Elwell wrote:
>
> New to Clojure, how is this function that I wrote? Any suggestions for
> improvemen
I reuploaded the patch 3 times for various reasons, please refresh to get
the latest.
Thanks,
Ambrose
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 12:44 AM, Ambrose Bonnaire-Sergeant <
abonnaireserge...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I handled preconditions, and added a new patch.
>
> Thanks,
> Ambrose
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 26, 2
I handled preconditions, and added a new patch.
Thanks,
Ambrose
On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 11:52 PM, Michael O'Keefe <
michael.p.oke...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Nice work everyone on the patches -- I'm very impressed!
>
> There's been a couple of questions about how to interpret this. My thought
> is w
Nice work everyone on the patches -- I'm very impressed!
There's been a couple of questions about how to interpret this. My thought
is we should try and mimic an explicit recursion:
In other words:
(defn g
[xs acc]
{:pre [(or (nil? xs) (sequential? xs)) (number? acc)]
:post [(number? %)]
Doh! I forgot preconditions :D
Fixing..
Ambrose
On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 11:30 PM, Ambrose Bonnaire-Sergeant <
abonnaireserge...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Steve,
>
> I think I got it right, please have a look:
> http://dev.clojure.org/jira/browse/CLJ-1475
>
> Thanks,
> Ambrose
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 26,
Hi Steve,
I think I got it right, please have a look:
http://dev.clojure.org/jira/browse/CLJ-1475
Thanks,
Ambrose
On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 10:38 PM, Ambrose Bonnaire-Sergeant <
abonnaireserge...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'll give it a shot..
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 9:59 PM, Steve Miner wrote:
I'll give it a shot..
On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 9:59 PM, Steve Miner wrote:
> I'm giving up on this bug. My approach was adding too much complexity to
> handle an edge case. Hacking the fn macro is not as easy as it looks. :-)
>
> I recommend the loop work-around if you run into this problem.
Using partition-by will give you a lazy sequence.
(defn only-keep-unique-ids [ids]
(map first (partition-by #(get-form-id-without-timestamp %) ids)))
On Saturday, 26 July 2014 07:32:43 UTC+10, Christopher Elwell wrote:
>
> New to Clojure, how is this function that I wrote? Any suggestions for
You can use `lein run` to execute a function from your project while
avoiding the complexity/distribution of a plugin.
In order to seed from a command line I would::
1. Write a function that can seed the data (like the blog post).
2. Use `lein run -m my.seed.ns/load-fixtures`. This will start a j
I'm giving up on this bug. My approach was adding too much complexity to
handle an edge case. Hacking the fn macro is not as easy as it looks. :-)
I recommend the loop work-around if you run into this problem. Or refactor the
recursive code into a separate function and call it from another fu
Hi all,
Using Leiningen, wonder what is the best way of seeding my database.
I used ragtime to do the migration. I could drop the database and recreate
it. After creating database, I would like to invoke some task to seed my
database.
One approach could
be
http://dustingetz.tumblr.com/post/2
Ah right, I'll look into get that built and will cut another release.
On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 4:38 AM, Thomas Heller wrote:
> Hey David,
>
> CLJS-826 is only partly resolved in this release since it only takes effect
> with a new closure-third-party release since the current jar is causing the
>
Speaking of CSRF, I have a slightly different setup from the Sente examples
where I use sente for all my communication after the initial load, whereas
the Sente examples use normal HTTP to perform logins and only use Sente
after login. This way the login request can set the client-id and CSRF
token
Hi Tim,
I think I went through this when I was first starting with Sente. You need to
setup the CSRF handling part, in the example code by including
ring-anti-forgery/wrap-anti-forgery in your routes. *AND* you have to make sure
that you are using one of those routes before you try to use Sent
Hey David,
CLJS-826 is only partly resolved in this release since it only takes effect
with a new closure-third-party release since the current jar is causing the
problem.
Would be nice if you could build a new closure release and bump the
dependency in clojurescript.
Thanks,
/thomas
On Fr
The intuitive behaviour (to me) would be that :pre is applied to every
recur as stated and post is applied only to the eventually returned value
and this *_should_ *be considered a bug. My logic is as follows:
1. A (pure, for simplicity of this argument) function, in the absence of
erroneou
22 matches
Mail list logo
