Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Enable users to specify additional file extensions that should trigger an auto-build. #300

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

briprowe
Copy link

When using enfocus, we often want clojurescript to be recompiled when an html file is modified. This enables the template definitions to reflect the newest markup.

@emezeske
Copy link
Owner

It seems like if you're adding an example, it should be part of the
advanced project. The simple project is intended to be the very most bare
bones config possible.

You'd also need to add an example to the sample project file in the root
directory of the repo.

(Note that I haven't looked at the code changes, just the file names.)
On Mar 10, 2014 12:51 PM, "Brian Rowe" [email protected] wrote:

When using enfocus, we often want clojurescript to be recompiled when an
html file is modified. This enables the template definitions to reflect the

newest markup.

You can merge this Pull Request by running

git pull https://github.com/briprowe/lein-cljsbuild source-ext-option

Or view, comment on, or merge it at:

#300
Commit Summary

  • Enable users to specify additional file extensions that should
    trigger an auto-build.

File Changes

Patch Links:

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//pull/300
.

@cemerick
Copy link
Collaborator

I like the feature.

In addition to @emezeske's suggestion re: updating the documentation/sample project, I'd also like it if you could revert the formatting changes you made, as it makes the diff basically useless (and thus shrink the likelihood of a merge). Feel free to change the arity of run-compiler (you'll need to change its usage in the plugin part of the project), it's not a "supported API" or anything.

@stuarth
Copy link

stuarth commented Mar 31, 2014

@cemerick @emezeske I pushed some changes to address your comments. What do you think?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants