Refine shadow-cljs doc #3360
Refine shadow-cljs doc #3360
Conversation
|
|
||
| === Tutorials | ||
|
|
||
| * https://cestlaz.github.io/post/using-emacs-63-clojurescript/[Using shadow-cljs with CIDER] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nothing against it per se, but it seems to me that if people needed a tutorial, we'd be failing at creating high-quality documentation.
Most practically, this video is a few years old now and we're not going to watch it each time something is updated.
| @@ -54,15 +54,26 @@ Alternatively you can start the server manually with something like: | |||
|
|
|||
| [source,sh] | |||
| ---- | |||
| $ npx shadow-cljs server | |||
| $ shadow-cljs watch app | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this means the command that CIDER uses should probably be updated as well - I recall it used to be the one that's currently in the docs.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
My thinking is that npx shadow-cljs server is a fine command for cider-jack-in-cljs since it's universal - it needs not to assume anything (is shadow installed? which build to use?)
But for cider-connect-cljs, given that the user is fully in control of the command, and can observe its output etc, should choose the best possible command.
| @@ -32,7 +32,9 @@ On the bright side - this also means that you can host side by side Clojure and | |||
| REPLs in a single nREPL connection! This opens up all sorts of interesting possibilities | |||
| that we'll discuss later on. | |||
|
|
|||
| == Differences with the Standard ClojureScript REPL | |||
| NOTE: `shadow-cljs`'s REPL is implemented in a very similar fashion, but its mechanism is provided by its own nREPL middleware - not Piggieback's. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sometimes we speak of piggieback as middleware, sometimes we speak of its middleware. It'd nice if the wording was consistent. I'm not sure if it's worth mentioning that the API that shadow exposes is the same as Piggieback's so that clients don't have to do anything different for it. (e.g. it even has session vars named the same was as in piggieback).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure if it's worth mentioning that the API that shadow exposes is the same as Piggieback's so that clients don't have to do anything different for it. (e.g. it even has session vars named the same was as in piggieback).
Perhaps that would invite people to add piggieback. Which might blow up at some point despite the compat effort.
| @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ and how to setup the most popular ClojureScript REPLs. | |||
| == nREPL and ClojureScript | |||
|
|
|||
| nREPL doesn't natively support ClojureScript evaluation, that why an additional | |||
| middleware is needed. CIDER relies on the popular Piggieback middleware for its | |||
| middleware is needed. For most REPLs (with the notable exception of `shadow-cljs`), CIDER relies on the popular Piggieback middleware for its | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There's also the self-hosted cases to consider (where you need a native nREPL implementation in the first place) - e.g. nbb works like this.
Refines some bits.