You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
It's not always feasible to write the entire spec inside the >defn, since the assertion predicates might be fairly involved and can end up being as big as the function itself.
Attempts to move it a little further from the definition via >fdef leads to it no longer being checked by ghostwheel.
It would be great if >fdef or something like it would be checked on (g/check).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
👋 Hi. I'm posting this same comment to all issue threads to just give a quick heads up that the project, despite rumours and some evidence to the contrary, is not dead. It was hibernating for a little while and now nearing the long-awaited next release, which will fix some long-standing issues (and introduce some breaking changes to the config).
I'll be reviewing all open issues and PRs over the next couple of weeks, so stay tuned and thanks for the patience.
It's not always feasible to write the entire spec inside the
>defn
, since the assertion predicates might be fairly involved and can end up being as big as the function itself.Attempts to move it a little further from the definition via
>fdef
leads to it no longer being checked by ghostwheel.It would be great if
>fdef
or something like it would be checked on(g/check)
.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: