Re: Connecting to nREPL on Intel Edison (via Cider) - why so slow?

On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 12:43 PM, Timothy Baldridge wrote: > Another option is to use Clojure's built-in socket server (requires > Clojure 1.8) it is really nothing more than a TCP socket attached to a > normal Clojure repl, so you'll be loading no extra middleware or

Re: Connecting to nREPL on Intel Edison (via Cider) - why so slow?

On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 12:39 PM, Sean Corfield wrote: > My understanding is that, by default, CIDER loads quite a bit of > middleware when it connects so that’s likely the cause of the slowdown. You > can override the middleware to provide a more stripped-down experience (but

Re: Connecting to nREPL on Intel Edison (via Cider) - why so slow?

Another option is to use Clojure's built-in socket server (requires Clojure 1.8) it is really nothing more than a TCP socket attached to a normal Clojure repl, so you'll be loading no extra middleware or really anything at all that could slow it down.

Re: Connecting to nREPL on Intel Edison (via Cider) - why so slow?

My understanding is that, by default, CIDER loads quite a bit of middleware when it connects so that’s likely the cause of the slowdown. You can override the middleware to provide a more stripped-down experience (but you’ll lose a lot of CIDER’s functionality) – check the CIDER docs for that.

Connecting to nREPL on Intel Edison (via Cider) - why so slow?

Hi, I'm having some trouble connecting from a Mac to an nREPL running on an Intel Edison. I'm using boot to launch the nREPL on the Edison; it's *very* slow to launch (~2 minutes 15 seconds), which is not too surprising since the Edison is a relatively constrained device (1 Mb RAM, Atom CPU at

Re: Why so?

On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 10:01 AM, Alan a...@malloys.org wrote: A very handy web page to have around; thanks for mentioning it. It looks nice too, but the accessibility is a bit poor - when I look at it with an increased text size, the CSS quickly falls apart and renders it confusing and/or

Re: Why so?

testabilty, and a lot of other ilities. On Sep 3, 12:50 am, vishy vishalsod...@gmail.com wrote: It is better to have 100 functions operate on one data structure than 10 functions on 10 data structures. -- Alan Perlis Why so? How is it advantageous? -- You received this message because you

Re: Why so?

thanks for the link!!! On Sep 3, 8:54 pm, David Nolen dnolen.li...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 11:50 AM, fin gpl...@gmail.com wrote: It is better to have 100 functions in one category than 10 functions in 10 categories? I don't think so. See:

Why so?

It is better to have 100 functions operate on one data structure than 10 functions on 10 data structures. -- Alan Perlis Why so? How is it advantageous? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure

Re: Why so?

:50 am, vishy vishalsod...@gmail.com wrote: It is better to have 100 functions operate on one data structure than 10 functions on 10 data structures. -- Alan Perlis Why so? How is it advantageous? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group

Re: Why so?

It is better to have 100 functions in one category than 10 functions in 10 categories? I don't think so. See: http://clojure.github.com/clojure/clojure.core-api.html -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to

Re: Why so?

On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 11:50 AM, fin gpl...@gmail.com wrote: It is better to have 100 functions in one category than 10 functions in 10 categories? I don't think so. See: http://clojure.github.com/clojure/clojure.core-api.html Clojure functions categorized:

Re: Why so?

A very handy web page to have around; thanks for mentioning it. It looks nice too, but the accessibility is a bit poor - when I look at it with an increased text size, the CSS quickly falls apart and renders it confusing and/or unreadable. So if the maintainer for that site is on this newsgroup

Re: Why so?

David Nolen dnolen.li...@gmail.com writes: Clojure functions categorized: http://clojuredocs.org/quickref/Clojure%20Core Wow, that is very nice -- especially the expandable view of the implementation source. -- Steven E. Harris -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the

Re: Why so?

Thanks for sharing this link David. Love it. On Sep 3, 8:54 am, David Nolen dnolen.li...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 11:50 AM, fin gpl...@gmail.com wrote: It is better to have 100 functions in one category than 10 functions in 10 categories? I don't think so. See: