Clojurians Log v2

@ericdallo Storing the name of the keyword as a string would help here. Alternatively clj-kondo could report the keyword as invalid and not output it in the analysis.

EDN should not be able to read symbols starting with a number. The spec already says these keywords aren't valid.

Also see https://github.com/clj-kondo/clj-kondo/issues/1160

Yeah, I see, not reporting probably would be better

Since we are parsing a giant analysis from the sqlite and have no way to know which analysis is wrong

So what does that PR merged do?

but if clj-kondo offered the name as a string, then it would be ok I think?

Yes, we 'd persist as a string

I reverted the merge, so let's just look at the problem from first principle

Just tested and a string value would be parsed correctly from db so probably the best approach for keywords buckets (or all buckets to keep the standard?)

We're already exposing the other buckets as documented features. I kept the keyword analysis undocumented to give it a trial run first

Maybe changing all the names to strings won't be a major break though, since (keyword ..) etc take symbols and strings?

Yes, it takes, looks valid to me

Created thsi to track on clojure-lsp side: https://github.com/clojure-lsp/clojure-lsp/issues/305

Something like that works great for me

(edn/read-string "{:name :2s}")

This would then be :name "2s"

oh, yeah, you are right

we'd need only the paces that use :name, to parse the string on clojure-lsp, not hard though

how are you using :name rigth now?

One place builds the full keyword from a analysis (`:foo/bar` from :alias and :name) and all the others use to compare one keyword analysis with another keyword analysis

so, looks changeable

yeah, we can change the keyword analysis surely, because no-one else is using that. but I meant the :name fields in the other analysis

oh got it, let me check

we can just change it for the keyword analysis though, PR welcome

can do it now

yeah, most places we get the string with (name ...) and others we compare with other fields. like :to :from :alias etc, I think would work, but some refacotr/check in all features

Maybe strings would have been better to start with. For people using JSON they won't notice the difference but I think there's clojure tooling which might break if we changed that

Ok, I can do it soon for keywords

yeah, for sure, for other analysis we need to be safe

Just for reference: https://github.com/clj-kondo/clj-kondo/pull/1162 will make the proper changes on clojure-lsp. thanks

merged

Tested with clojure-lsp and it worked great!

yay!