I desire a Linux system for web development

(Still pondering this. Likely wrong here.) I’ll have an easier time developing with Linux. On Windows, I’m switching between Bash for Windows and Powershell constantly. Tools like clj, Docker (try execcing into a shell), and Babashka (the repl eventually bugs out) simply don’t work fully in Bash for Windows. Bash provides a cleaner experience, offering concise linux commands like which to find an installation path vs. Powershell’s (Get-Command cmd).Path, but it gets second-class support on Windows.

A Reagent component is a function that returns a "V(oV)oKaHoC"

…A vector (of vectors) of keywords, mashmaps, or components. Keywords represent html tags. Hashmaps represent attributes for the html tags. Vars that refer to functions that return the V(oV)oKaHs are components that do these things one level deeper. Simple: (defn card [] [:card "Hi"]) Less simple: (defn card [] [:card [:img {:src "img/card-icon.svg" :alt "Tiny logo for the card"}] [:h2 "Card title"] [:p "Card text"]]) More less simple: (defn card [] [:card [:img {:src "img/card-icon.

"Getting" macros

Macros let you leverage the understanding of the reader and evaluator. I perceive Clojure’s process to be: “Text -> List of symbols -> Macro list of symbols -> Evaluation”. Macros take the symbols of arguments before they’re evaluated so that you can change the content and order of the list before they’re evaluated. Define macros with defmacro and pass in the forms. The arguments given are parts of the list before evaluated.

I don't understand the classpath?

I suspect my understanding of the “classpath” and Figwheel/ClojureScript’s use of it is inadequate, else the wow.core namespace and all its interns (namespace-bound defined variables) would be there. I used clj -m figwheel.main expecting it to work with my namespace, but it didn’t. After calling clj -m figwheel.main from Powershell and then in-ns from the REPL into my wow.core namespace then calling each function in the REPL, Figwheel/ClojureScript responded saying that each function “undeclared”.

I can use Figwheel (maybe), `doo`, JS interop, or raw JS to test against the dom

It’s easier to test the front-end with JavaScript than with ClojureScript at the moment. JS has many tools (Puppeteer, Selenium, PhantomJS) to let me spawn a browser, a page from a browser, interact with the page, and then test for what’s on the page based on my interaction. I have four leads right now for testing functions on the dom: Figwheel, doo, the use of JS libraries via JS interop, and raw JS testing against the ClJS-compiled JS.

My version control workflow

I can make development easy by following the version control workflow for each feature. First glance at the release notes (i.e. to see what the current focus is), then start the following commands with git : Start checkout main status pull origin main checkout [-b] my-branch-name-w-semver status During (Tests) (Code) Feature complete status add -A commit -S -m '[message]' checkout main pull merge [branch-name] push branch -d [branch-name]

Categorize obstacles as "Inspiration to Action", "Know-how", or "Activity Knowledge"

I wanted to know how to follow the Strategy Circle better and with more consistency. An aha came as I remembered W. Clement Stone’s Success System that Never Fails, which consists of: Inspiration to Action (I2A), Know-how (KH), and Activity Knowledge (AK). The aha is to categorize the obstacle in one of these three ways and act accordingly. I2A involves raw desire times the energy to achieve it. If I lack drive, refine my self-image into one who feels pain from not achieving the thing and pleasure from achieving it.

For structure and ease of consumption, I want to "purpose-ify" and outline my communication

I want to structure my communication better. Adler in Chapter 7 of How to Read a Book recommends IDing the unity and then the parts of the unity when reading. Explaining this, he says the writer should ideally consider this when forming his material. If he did, then the unity and structure’d be obvious. His comment on this motivates me to consider doing this. Going forward, I’ll start purposing and outlining my communications before responding instead of just “going with the flow”.

Successful online businesses securely accept payment and fairly deliver a great service

Securely accepting payment and ensuring the app delivers a great service is the crux to a successful online business. I have business ideas, but I need to solve this problem for all of ‘em. I’ll process payments through Stripe and CoinPayments to leverage their security. I’ll then use the “payment successful” responses from their services to update the db and provide different tools based on the payment. But how to process refunds?

To make your ClojureScript app work, use underscores not dashes with your files

(OLD POST: ClojureScript, which uses Google Closure, neglects non-core namespaces when I set :language-out to :es-next. For my pargraph splitter, I have an ECMAScript2018-only feature that lacks a polyfill: reverse lookbehind. My desire to know why outweighs my need to finish the product, so instead of neglecting the use of that, I’ve tried to figure out how to output ECMAScrpt2018+ JS with the reverse lookbehind feature. Google Closure defaultly transpiles code to ECMAScript3 [source needed], but you can change the output language to different ECMAScript (JavaScript) standards.