How can I use a different React version with Reagent, Om, Rum, Quiescent or Brutha?
Self answer since this is asked frequently:
First you have to tell Leiningen to exclude the cljsjs/react dependencies:
[rum "0.6.0" :exclusions [[cljsjs/react] [cljsjs/react-dom]]]
If you have other dependencies pulling in cljsjs/react you can use a global exclusion:
:exclusions [[cljsjs/react] [cljsjs/react-dom]]
Next you have to satisfy the compiler since it won't find the namespaces cljsjs.react and cljsjs.react.dom. For this create two files that hold these namespaces in your source directory. For instance
- src/cljsjs/react.cljs
- src/cljsjs/react/dom.cljs
Both only need the namespace declaration and can otherwise be empty (ns cljsjs.react).
Now you can include any React version you'd like manually in your HTML file with a normal <script> tag.
Alternative:
You can also use foreign-libs compiler option.
Related
I am developing a web component using Polymer v3, and need to include some custom elements defined in legacy Polymer 2 components in the template HTML of my new component.
Since HTML imports are no longer supported in Polymer 3, what approach should I take to include them? If I was using Polymer 2 I could just add the following in my component's HTML file:
<link rel="import" href="../my-legacy-component.html">
I have tried adding the above link into the template HTML of my component, but it appears that doesn't work. I have also tried various import commands to reference the JS files inside the legacy component directly, but received various inscrutable JS errors so I'm not sure if that is the correct way to go either.
I can't believe there isn't a simple way to do this - would the Polymer team really introduce a new version of the library that is completely incompatible with all the components created using older versions?
Did you try to use polymer-modulizer?
Modulizer performs many different upgrade tasks, like:
Detects which .html files are used as HTML Imports and moves them to .js
Rewrites in HTML to import in JS.
Removes "module wrappers" - IIFEs that scopes your code.
Converts bower.json to package.json, using the corresponding packages on npm.
Converts "namespace references" to the proper JS module import, ie: Polymer.Async.timeOut to timeOut as imported from #polymer/polymer/lib/util/async.
Creates exports for values assigned to namespace referencs. ie, Foo.bar = {...} becomes export const bar = {...}
Rewrites namespace objects - an object with many members intended to be used as a module-like object, to JS modules.
Moves Polymer element templates from HTML into a JS template string.
Removes s if they only contained a template.
Moves other generic HTML in the document into a JS string and creates it when the module runs.
more on github
I have ran into the same problem with the module js-yaml earlier. I don't have enough reputation for a comment yet so I just write it down here.
Run this sudo npm install -g js-yaml -> This will install the missing package for the tool
Then at the root of your project, run modulizer --import-style name --out . -> This will convert your component from Polymer 2 to Polymer 3. The option --import-style name tells the tool to use package name instead of path. --out will make the tool writes those files to the directory.
After that, if no error prompts. Try to serve it with polymer serve --module-resolution=node -> Since we are using node modules now, we have to provide the --module-resolution=node option.
I wrote a library in Cython that has two different "modes":
If rendering, I compile using GLFW.
If not rendering, I compile using EGL, which is faster, but I have not figured out how to render with it.
What is the recommended way to handle this situation?
Right now, I have the following directory structure:
mujoco
├── __init__.py
├── simEgl.pyx
├── simGlfw.pyx
├── sim.pxd
└── sim.pyx
simEgl.pyx contains EGL code and simGlfw.pyx contains GLFW code. setup.py uses an environment variable to choose one or the other for the build.
This works ok, except that I need to recompile the code every time I want to switch between modes. There must be a better way.
Update
I agree that the best approach is to simultaneously compile two different libraries and use a toggle to choose which one to import. I already do have a base class in sim.pyx with shared functionality. However this base class must itself be compiled with the separate libraries. Specifically, sim.pyx depends on libmujoco.so which depends on either GLFW or EGL.
Here is my exhaustive search of possible approaches:
If I do not compile an extension for sim.pyx, I get ImportError: No module named 'mujoco.sim'
If I compile an extension for sim.pyx without including graphics libraries in the extension, I get ImportError: /home/ethanbro/.mujoco/mjpro150/bin/libmujoco150.so: undefined symbol: __glewBlitFramebuffer
If I compile an extension for sim.pyx and choose one set of graphics libraries (GLFW), then when I try to use the other set of graphics libraries (EGL) this does not work either unsurprisingly:
ERROR: GLEW initalization error: Missing GL version
If I compile two different versions of the sim.pyx library, one with one set of libraries, one with the other, I get: TypeError: unorderable types: dict() < dict() which is not a very helpful error message, but appears to result from trying to share a source file between two different extensions.
Something like option 4 should be possible. In fact, if I were working in raw C, I would simply build two shared objects side by side using the different libraries. Any advice on how to get around this Cython limitation would be very welcome.
(This answer is just a summary of the comments with a bit more explanation.)
My initial suggestion was to create two extension modules defining a common interface. That way you pick which to import in Python but be able to use them in the same way once imported:
if rendering:
import simGlfw as s
else:
import simEgl as s
s.do_something() # doesn't matter which you imported
It appears from the comments that the two modules also share a large chunk of their code and its really just the library that they're linked with that defines how they behave. Trying to re-use the same sources with
Extension(name='sim1', sources=["sim.pyx",...)
Extension(name='sim2', sources=["sim.pyx",...)
fails. This is because Cython assumes that the module name will be the same as the filename, and so creates a function PyInit_sim (on Python 3 - Python 2 is named slightly differently but the idea is the same). However, when you import sim1.so it looks for the function PyInit_sim1, fails to find it, and gives an error.
An easy way round it is to put the common code in "sim.pxi" and use Cython's largely obsolete include mechanism to textually include that code in sim1.pyx and sim2.pyx
include "sim.pxi"
Although include is generally no longer recommended and cimport is preferred since it provides more "Python-like" behaviour, include is a simple solution to this particular problem.
I have an existing web UI that I would like to be able to call a function written in ClojureScript. The function would be in a separate ClojureScript module (cs_func.js file) that does not need access to the DOM. I can't find any examples on how to do this.
Yes, this is possible (cf. how to use a complex return object from clojurescript in javascript… for instance). As you already figured out, ClojureScript will be compiled to normal JavaScript files (where "normal" varies according to your cljsbuild settings on how aggressive the output will be optimized). This is more a Javascript question on how to access the compiled JavaScript module than anything else.
You should be aware, however, that the output from cljsbuild might get mingled and that you probably want to prohibit this for your entrypoints, cf. the discussion in the section "Exporting ClojureScript functions" in this article on ClojureScript/JavaScript interop and the even more detailed discussion in Luke VanderHarts article on using JavaScript and ClojureScript
I'm writing some atom (the editor) package with ClojureScript. And i faced dependency load issue.
When compiled ClojureScript produces file like this (main.js):
goog.addDependency("base.js", ['goog'], []);
goog.addDependency("../cljs/core.js", ['cljs.core'], ...)
goog.addDependency("../clojure/browser/event.js", ...)
Obviously, ClojureScript heavily depends on Google Closure dependency management.
But, to be able to use Google Closure i need to include goog/base.js file.
The only way that i found is to add to goog/base.js:
module.exports = goog
and add to main.js:
require('./goog/base.js')
This is very bad approach, because these files are generated - so they can be overridden.
Also, release compilation will not include these lines.
The question is how can i use both these dependency systems?
Or is it possible to use ClojureScript w/o Google Closure?
Please advice, thanks!
If you set your ClojureScript :optimizations to something other than :none (e.g., :whitespace) then the resulting .js file will include the Google Closure code inlined and you won't have to reference it separately.
(Note that this means you might not be able to use a main function in your ClojureScript code, but you can just put a call to your main function somewhere at the toplevel.)
I have a project containing a big package "global" of classes which is designed for Web, I need to share these classes with a new mobile project, but when i add them with :
Properties -> Flex Build Path -> Source path -> Add Folder
they start appearing with index [source path] before the package name, and since them Flash Builder start trowing error messages :
"A file found in a source-path must have the same package structure '', as the definition's package, 'global'."
How can i fix this issue ?
As we've discussed in the comments, I think it would be a better approach to compile your "global" classes into a library (.swc).
You were concerned about loading unnecessary classes: when you link to a library as 'merged', only the classes you use are actually compiled into the main application (and any classes they depend on), so there's no need to worry about that.
As a last argument I also think this is a more flexible approach. A compiled library is easier to reuse and version, so the code can more easily be distributed to other developers on your team.
Rename one of the packages with right click->refactor. Than is should work.
If not you can also try to have your two codes available at the same project, and then you can select which to run in Flash Builder, by right-clicking to that .as or .mxml file, and selecting set as ... (or something like that)
I guess if you will include 'src' fonder instead of 'src/global' that problem will disappear.