Clojurians Log v2

@thedavidmeister uploaded a file: https://clojurians.slack.com/files/U0D4G0Q4U/F9RK10KGS/screen_shot_2018-03-18_at_1.01.09_am.png

what's going on here??

how can email be undefined if it is part of the fn signature?

is this something to do with javelin?

Try it with formula-of instead - cell= is sort of finicky.

If it works with formula-of then it’s probably a macroexpansion bug in cell=. It’s pretty much why I wrote formula-of

mmm that's bad

It works most of the time.

completely WSOD me on prod and can't reproduce locally 😕

Advanced compilation different between the two contexts?

nah, using advanced

ok, hmm now i can reproduce

weird

hmm, looks like if i only put email in the cell= once it works

but that could just be a coincidence...

like, maybe it potentially breaks in advanced compilation if a cell= references the same cell more than once?

i'm just guessing at this point...

Well, formula-of is way simpler than cell=, which is why I suggest trying it. You can also use the underlying formula form to eliminate code walking from the picture. I don’t really trust code-walking, which is why I suspect it here.

formula-of also does not code walk, to be clear.

the __$1 looks a little suss to me, like it's incrementing to a new symbol name instead of using the same one twice maybe?

That could be a variable introduced by cell= or it could just be the cljs compiler - no idea.

or a weird combination of the two...

Yep. Hence my suggestion to pare down towards a more minimal situation.

mmk i'll checkout formula-of when i've got time

for now i just have to get prod back up 😛

Good luck!

might need to "borrow" some more of your code in the next hoplon branch 😉

can you flick me a link to formula-of on github?

It’s already part of Javelin.

oh ok

well good then 🙂

@candera ah i c

it's like a magic defn

?

the structure of formula-of looks a lot like defn to me

Sure, I could see that.

well fn actually

It’s really just a thin wrapper around formula, mostly because I found it confusing to do by hand.

And because I had trouble with cell=

mmm

i like it

i'd also support it being called fn 😛

so i could do (j/fn [x] (* x x))

(def fn j/formula-of). Boom.

😉

tempting

Obviously that would be in your own namespace, so go for it. But I think it’s a mistake.

It’s not defining a function.

well what does "formula of" mean?

It’s a Javelin concept. Well-defined.

hah ok

formula and function are pretty interchangeable words in other contexts

If you want something short I suggest fm.

yeah

save me some typing

cell= is pretty common

I’m not big on short names myself.

Right. Defines a formula cell. 🙂

yeah you know what, i can just do it

clojure saves so much typing, i can always put a little back in

i also don't like aliases much

there's a handful that i use a ton, like h for hoplon and j for javelin

Like I said, I’m a fan of more descriptive names, even when it comes at the expense of brevity.

me too

very quickly lose track of what letters mean what

Yes, my brain is too tiny to remember more than one or two things. 😛

and it's easier to refactor if i can search the whole project for something

h, j, d (datascript), spec

that's it for me...

oh, and is and deftest 🙂

this is definitely one of those situations where i really didn't need formula-of until i really did

@candera formula-of fixed it!

but it wasn't the duplicate use of the symbol...

that didn't fix it on prod

only local

so i don't know what the problem was, but it's fixed now 🙂