xyhp915

ClojureScript master now has cljs.core/eval. This delegates to cljs.core/*eval* which, by default throws, but you can bind it to any implementation that can compile and evaluate ClojureScript forms.

If you require the cljs.js namespace (which is the main support namespace for self-hosted ClojureScript), then cljs.core/*eval* is set to an implementation that uses self-hosted ClojureScript for this capability. This means that all self-hosted ClojureScript environments will now have a first-class eval implementation that just works. For example, Planck master:

$ planck -q
cljs.user=> (eval '(+ 2 3))
5

xyhp915

Mammamia Marcello what's this?

I know what you're thinking of while reading this gist, but I don't have much spare time to setup a Nextcloud server for syncing my contacts and my calendar This guide is intended for those users like me (lazy af) who wanna sync contacts and calendar with Google server, even if using microG.

Requirements

• Latest TWRP available for your device. For more infos on how to flash it, check here
• Latest stable Google Calendar Sync APK from APKMirror
• Latest stable Google Contacts Sync APK from APKMirror

xyhp915

(ns core-util
  (:require [clojure.set :as set]))

(defn deselect-keys 
  "Returns a map containing only those entries in map whose key is not in ks"
  [m ks]
  (->> (set/difference (set (keys m)) (set ks))
       (select-keys m)))

xyhp915

<!-- Goes into viewer.html just before ending </body> -->
<script>
    let pinchZoomEnabled = false;
    function enablePinchZoom(pdfViewer) {
        let startX = 0, startY = 0;
        let initialPinchDistance = 0;        
        let pinchScale = 1;    
        const viewer = document.getElementById("viewer");
        const container = document.getElementById("viewerContainer");
        const reset = () => { startX = startY = initialPinchDistance = 0; pinchScale = 1; };

xyhp915

--- Actions ---
$Copy                                              <M-C>
$Cut                                               <M-X> <S-Del>
$Delete                                            <Del> <BS> <M-BS>
$LRU                                              
$Paste                                             <M-V>
$Redo                                              <M-S-Z> <A-S-BS>
$SearchWeb                                         <A-S-G>
$SelectAll                                         <M-A>
$Undo                                              <M-Z>

xyhp915

{:tasks {:requires ([babashka.fs :as fs])
         :init (do (when (seq (fs/modified-since "deps.edn"
                                                 ["deps.template.edn"
                                                  "../base/deps.edn"]))
                     (shell {:dir ".."} "script/gen-deps.clj")))

         ;; Maintenance tasks
         install {:doc "Install frontend dependencies from NPM"
                  :task (shell "npm install")}
         clean {:doc "Clean all artifacts"

xyhp915

<code_scheme name="TW" version="173">
  <ClojureCodeStyleSettings>{
  :cljs.core/as-&gt; :only-indent
  :cljs.core/assoc 0
  :cljs.core/cond-&gt; :only-indent
  :cljs.core/cond-&gt;&gt; :only-indent
  :cljs.core/defonce :only-indent
  :cljs.core/with-meta :only-indent
  :cljs.core.async/go :only-indent
  :cljs.core.async/go-loop :only-indent

xyhp915

This is a post by Joel Spolsky. The original post is linked at the bottom.

This is such a common question here and elsewhere that I will attempt to write the world's most canonical answer to this question. Hopefully in the future when someone on answers.onstartups asks how to split up the ownership of their new company, you can simply point to this answer.

The most important principle: Fairness, and the perception of fairness, is much more valuable than owning a large stake. Almost everything that can go wrong in a startup will go wrong, and one of the biggest things that can go wrong is huge, angry, shouting matches between the founders as to who worked harder, who owns more, whose idea was it anyway, etc. That is why I would always rather split a new company 50-50 with a friend than insist on owning 60% because "it was my idea," or because "I was more experienced" or anything else. Why? Because if I split the company 60-40, the company is going to fail when we argue ourselves to death. And if you ju

xyhp915

(conj collection item) adds item to collection. To do that, it needs to realize collection. (I'll explain why below.) So the recursive call happens immediately, rather than being deferred.

(cons item collection) creates a sequence which begins with item, followed by everything in collection. Significantly, it doesn't need to realize collection. So the recursive call will be deferred (because of using lazy-seq) until somebody tries to get the tail of the resulting sequence.

The following is how it works internally:

cons actually returns a clojure.lang.Cons object, which is what lazy sequences are made of. conj returns the same type of collection which you pass it (whether that is a list, vector, or whatever else). conj does this using a polymorphic Java method call on the collection itself. (See line 524 of clojure/src/jvm/clojure/lang/RT.java.)

What happens w

xyhp915

(defn tree-seq-depth
  "Returns a lazy sequence of vectors of the nodes in a tree and their
  depth as [node depth], via a depth-first walk.  branch? must be a fn
  of one arg that returns true if passed a node that can have
  children (but may not).  children must be a fn of one arg that
  returns a sequence of the children. Will only be called on nodes for
  which branch? returns true. Root is the root node of the tree."
  [branch? children root]
  (let [walk (fn walk [depth node]
               (lazy-seq