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

Bump the nREPL dep #185

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 29, 2018
Merged

Bump the nREPL dep #185

merged 1 commit into from
Aug 29, 2018

Conversation

bbatsov
Copy link
Collaborator

@bbatsov bbatsov commented Aug 29, 2018

No description provided.

@trptcolin trptcolin merged commit dc3ce54 into trptcolin:master Aug 29, 2018
@trptcolin
Copy link
Owner

Hey, sorry, I needed to revert back to nrepl 0.4.2, because of some breaking changes in 0.4.3 (in particular the structure of nrepl.server.Server).

I made a couple new issues for the missing integration test coverage, and the bump to the latest nrepl.

@bbatsov
Copy link
Collaborator Author

bbatsov commented Oct 1, 2018

@trptcolin What breaking changes? The removal of the legacy code from nREPL 0.1 what treated the Server as a ref?

@bbatsov
Copy link
Collaborator Author

bbatsov commented Oct 1, 2018

Seems so. :-) This was deprecated so many years ago that I assumed no one was using this at point. Anyways, at least the fix for this is simple - it's now just a regular record.

@trptcolin
Copy link
Owner

Yeah, I think that and also the field access needs to change from :ss to :server-socket. And now that I look closer, it looks like the place that threw could be changed to (:port server) (instead of drilling through deref, :ss, .getLocalPort (at least as of 2012; based on nrepl/nrepl@8c52a26)

@bbatsov
Copy link
Collaborator Author

bbatsov commented Oct 1, 2018

Yep, you can access the port directly now.

@bbatsov
Copy link
Collaborator Author

bbatsov commented Oct 1, 2018

Btw, this 0 check is no longer needed as well:

:port (Integer/parseInt (str (or port 0)))))

If there's no port nREPL assumes 0 anyways.

@bbatsov
Copy link
Collaborator Author

bbatsov commented Oct 1, 2018

And sorry for the oversight on my part! I thought I checked explicitly for this, but I guess I didn't.

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.

2 participants