Conditionally Show Content or not inside deftemplate macro (Clojure - Enlive) - if-statement

So far I've managed to figure out how to duplicate a div with clone-for, but I haven't found a function for conditionally applying a transformation, while inside the deftemplate macro.
(deftemplate threads "thread.html" [xs]
[:div.entry] ;hook to a div
(clone-for [x xs] ;for each in the array passed in
(if (contains? x :picture) ;if picture in object
([:div.entry :> :img] (set-attr :src (:picture x))) ;show picture
([:div.entry] (set-attr :style "display:none;"))) ;else hide element
;do more things here
))
(threads [{:picture 'link goes here'},{},...])
returns
java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Key must be integer
I'm wondering if anyone more experienced with enlive could help? I'm not sure what the following should propely be written as.
(if (contains? x :picture) ;if picture in object
([:div.entry :> :img] (set-attr :src (:picture x))) ;show picture
([:div.entry] (set-attr :style "display:none;"))) ;else hide element
EDIT: I've commented and cut out code not related to my question below, at the suggestion of Alan.

Related

Clojure: How to determine if a nested list contains non-numeric items?

I need to write a Clojure function which takes an unevaluated arbitrarily deep nesting of lists as input, and then determines if any item in the list (not in function position) is non-numeric. This is my first time writing anything in Clojure so I am a bit confused. Here is my first attempt at making the function:
(defn list-eval
[x]
(for [lst x]
(for [item lst]
(if(integer? item)
(println "")
(println "This list contains a non-numeric value")))))
I tried to use a nested for-loop to iterate through each item in every nested list. Trying to test the function like so:
=> (list-eval (1(2 3("a" 5(3)))))
results in this exception:
ClassCastException java.lang.Long cannot be cast to clojure.lang.IFn listeval.core/eval7976 (form-init4504441070457356195.clj:1)
Does the problem here lie in the code, or in how I call the function and pass an argument? In either case, how can I make this work as intended?
This happens because (1 ..) is treated as calling a function, and 1 is a Long, and not a function. First you should change the nested list to '(1(2 3("a" 5(3)))). Next you can change your function to run recursively:
(defn list-eval
[x]
(if (list? x)
(for [lst x] (list-eval lst))
(if (integer? x)
(println "")
(println "This list contains a non-numeric value"))))
=> (list-eval '(1(2 3("a" 5(3)))))
There is a cool function called tree-seq that does all the hard work for you in traversing the structure. Use it then remove any collections, remove all numbers, and check if there is anything left.
(defn any-non-numbers?
[x]
(->> x
(tree-seq coll? #(if (map? %) (vals %) %))
(remove (some-fn coll? number?))
not-empty
boolean))
Examples:
user=> (any-non-numbers? 1)
false
user=> (any-non-numbers? [1 2])
false
user=> (any-non-numbers? [1 2 "sd"])
true
user=> (any-non-numbers? [1 2 "sd" {:x 1}])
true
user=> (any-non-numbers? [1 2 {:x 1}])
false
user=> (any-non-numbers? [1 2 {:x 1 :y "hello"}])
true
If you want to consider map keys as well, just change (vals %) to (interleave (keys %) (vals %)).
quoting
As others have mentioned, you need to quote a list to keep it from being evaluated as
code. That's the cause of the exception you're seeing.
for and nesting
for will only descend to the nesting depth you tell it to. It is not a for loop,
as you might expect, but a sequence comprehension, like the the python list comprehension.
(for [x xs, y ys] y) will presume that xs is a list of lists and flatten it.
(for [x xs, y ys, z zs] z) Is the same but with an extra level of nesting.
To walk down to any depth, you'd usually use recursion.
(There are ways to do this iteratively, but they're more difficult to wrap your head around.)
side effects
You're doing side effects (printing) inside a lazy sequence. This will work at the repl,
but if you're not using the result anywhere, it won't run and cause great confusion.
It's something every new clojurian bumps into at some point.
(doseq is like for, but for side effects.)
The clojure way is to separate functions that work with values from functions that
"do stuff", like printing to the console of launching missiles, and to keep the
side effecting functions as simple as possible.
putting it all together
Let's make a clear problem statement: Is there a non number anywhere inside an
arbitrarily nested list? If there is, print a message saying that to the console.
In a lot of cases, when you'd use a for loop in other langs reduce is what you want in clojure.
(defn collect-nested-non-numbers
;; If called with one argument, call itself with empty accumulator
;; and that argument.
([form] (collect-nested-non-numbers [] form))
([acc x]
(if (coll? x)
;; If x is a collection, use reduce to call itself on every element.
(reduce collect-nested-non-numbers acc x)
;; Put x into the accumulator if it's a non-number
(if (number? x)
acc
(conj acc x)))))
;; A function that ends in a question mark is (by convention) one that
;; returns a boolean.
(defn only-numbers? [form]
(empty? (collect-nested-non-numbers form)))
;; Our function that does stuff becomes very simple.
;; Which is a good thing, cause it's difficult to test.
(defn warn-on-non-numbers [form]
(when-not (only-numbers? form)
(println "This list contains a non-numeric value")))
And that'll work. There already exists a bunch of things that'll help you walk a nested structure, though, so you don't need to do it manually.
There's the clojure.walk namespace that comes with clojure. It's for when you have
a nested thing and want to transform some parts of it. There's tree-seq which is explained
in another answer. Specter is a library which is
a very powerful mini language for expressing transformations of nested structures.
Then there's my utils library comfy which contains reduce versions of the
functions in clojure.walk, for when you've got a nested thing and want to "reduce" it to a single value.
The nice thing about that is that you can use reduced which is like the imperative break statement, but for reduce. If it finds a non-number it doesn't need to keep going through the whole thing.
(ns foo.core
(:require
[madstap.comfy :as comfy]))
(defn only-numbers? [form]
(comfy/prewalk-reduce
(fn [ret x]
(if (or (coll? x) (number? x))
ret
(reduced false)))
true
form))
Maybe by "any item in the list (not in function position)" you meant this?
(defn only-numbers-in-arg-position? [form]
(comfy/prewalk-reduce
(fn [ret x]
(if (and (list? x) (not (every? (some-fn number? list?) (rest x))))
(reduced false)
ret))
true
form))

Conditional "assignment" in functional programming

I am programming something that doesn't have side-effects, but my code is not very readable.
Consider the following piece of code:
(let [csv_data (if header_row (cons header_row data_rows) data_rows)]
)
I'm trying to use csv_data in a block of code. What is a clean way of conditioning on the presence of a header_row? I've looked at if-let, but couldn't see how that could help here.
I have run into similar situations with functional for-loops as well where I'm binding the result to a local variable, and the code looks like a pile of expressions.
Do I really have to create a separate helper function in so many cases?
What am I missing here?
Use the cond->> macro
(let [csv_data (cond->> data_rows
header_row (cons header-row)]
)
It works like the regular ->> macro, but before each threading form a test expression has to be placed that determines whether the threading form will be used.
There is also cond->. Read more about threading macros here: Official threading macros guide
First, don't use underscore, prefer dashes.
Second, there is nothing wrong with a little helper function; after all, this seems to be a requirement for handling your particular data format.
Third, if you can change your data so that you can skip those decisions and have a uniform representation for all corner cases, this is even better. A header row contains a different kind of data (column names?), so you might prefer to keep them separate:
(let [csv {:header header :rows rows}]
...)
Or maybe at some point you could have "headers" and "rows" be of the same type: sequences of rows. Then you can concat them directly.
The ensure-x idiom is a very common way to normalize your data:
(defn ensure-list [data]
(and data (list data)))
For example:
user=> (ensure-list "something")
("something")
user=> (ensure-list ())
(())
user=> (ensure-list nil)
nil
And thus:
(let [csv (concat (ensure-list header) rows)]
...)
i would propose an utility macro. Something like this:
(defmacro update-when [check val-to-update f & params]
`(if-let [x# ~check]
(~f x# ~val-to-update ~#params)
~val-to-update))
user> (let [header-row :header
data-rows [:data1 :data2]]
(let [csv-data (update-when header-row data-rows cons)]
csv-data))
;;=> (:header :data1 :data2)
user> (let [header-row nil
data-rows [:data1 :data2]]
(let [csv-data (update-when header-row data-rows cons)]
csv-data))
;;=> [:data1 :data2]
it is quite universal, and lets you fulfill more complex tasks then just simple consing. Like for example you want to reverse some coll if check is trueish, and concat another list...
user> (let [header-row :header
data-rows [:data1 :data2]]
(let [csv-data (update-when header-row data-rows
(fn [h d & params] (apply concat (reverse d) params))
[1 2 3] ['a 'b 'c])]
csv-data))
;;=> (:data2 :data1 1 2 3 a b c)
update
as noticed by #amalloy , this macro should be a function:
(defn update-when [check val-to-update f & params]
(if check
(apply f check val-to-update params)
val-to-update))
After thinking about the "cost" of a one-line helper function in the namespace I've came up with a local function instead:
(let [merge_header_fn (fn [header_row data_rows]
(if header_row
(cons header_row data_rows)
data_rows))
csv_data (merge_header_fn header_row data_rows) ]
...
<use csv_data>
...
)
Unless someone can suggest a more elegant way of handling this, I will keep this as an answer.

Reagent: Does defining a component inside another component cause performance issues?

In Reagent, let's assume that I am defining a helper-function that returns a child component within a render function of the parent component.
Does this cause new child components to be generated every time the render function runs?
Here is a minimal example to illustrate:
(defn ChildComponent [text]
[:p text])
(defn ParentComponent [names-vector]
(let [renderChild (fn [i]
[ChildComponent (get names-vector i)])]
[:div
[renderChild 1]
[renderChild 3]
[renderChild 5]]))
I have defined a renderChild function within the let as a helper function, to avoid duplicating the (get names-vector i) every time I use ChildComponent.
Preferably I'd like this to be almost exactly equivalent to:
(defn ChildComponent [text]
[:p text])
(defn ParentComponent [names-vector]
[:div
[ChildComponent (get names-vector 1)]
[ChildComponent (get names-vector 3)]
[ChildComponent (get names-vector 5)]])
where a change in names-vector will potentially trigger a re-rendering of ChildComponents, but not destruction and creation.
Does Reagent expand the first example to the second? Or are there potentially significant performance issues with the first example due to repeated component destruction/creation?
I've been using Reagent for about a year now, and I do exactly this kind of
thing. I'd say it's the suggested thing to do even. Reagent will also
implicitly uses the arguments as indicators to know whether to re-render the
component or not, so it's pretty optimized for knowing when to re-render. Now,
my use case is probably smaller than some others out there, but I've been
extremely happy on the performance front with this kind of setup. As best as I
can tell, it's the encouraged design pattern.
The one thing to watch out for is when dealing with a list of similar
elements (table row, item lists, etc.), you probably want to attach metadata to
uniquely identify each sibling. React will use this under-the-hood to optimize
the rendering.
So, in your case, you may want something more like:
[:div
^{:key 1} [renderChild 1]
^{:key 2} [renderChild 3]
^{:key 5} [renderChild 5]]))
Update
So, I misspoke: the issue with this technique is that a new function is created
every time the parent is re-rendered, which Reagent will see and be forced to
call the new function to get the potentially new children--since the "component"
appears to have changed. I also did not use the functions in the same way the
original poster did. Instead, when I needed to repeat elements, I opted for the
form:
(into []
(for [i [1 3 5]]
[ChildComponent (get names-vector i)]))
Or you could do the following instead:
(let [renderChild (fn [i]
[ChildComponent (get names-vector i)])]
(into []
(for [i [1 3 5]]
(renderChild i))))
The first form simply avoids the extra function definition. The second form
causes renderChild to be evaluated before returning the data, so Reagent never
sees the temporary function--thus side-stepping the need to have Reagent
evaluate it to find out the children haven't changed.
But in looking through the code for our app, we opted for the first form over
the second in all cases, or simply broke the function out and gave it a
name--where it made sense.
Also, this example is poor:
[:div
^{:key 1} [renderChild 1]
^{:key 2} [renderChild 3]
^{:key 5} [renderChild 5]]))
Adding keys only matters if the number of list elements is going to change.
AFAICT, React uses that information to help optimize the diff computation and
allows it to compute more easily which members need to be discarded and which
were added. If it's static, then it doesn't matter. A better example would be:
(into [:div]
(for [val some-coll]
^{:key (compute-key val)} [:p (get some-other-coll val)]))
Where the contents of some-coll can change.
I have explored this issue further, and unfortunately it appears that Reagent does not cache components if the component definition occurs within the let bindings of another component's render function.
Sample code used for experimentation:
(defonce app-state (r/atom 0))
(defn Clicker []
[:h2 {:on-click #(swap! app-state inc)} "Click me"])
(defn Displayer [n]
(let [a (r/atom (js/console.log "Component generated!"))]
(fn [n]
[:p "Hello, yes I ignore my input"])))
(defn Intermediate1 [n]
[Displayer n])
(defn Intermediate2 [n]
(let [Subcomponent (fn [x] [Displayer x])]
[Subcomponent n]))
(defn my-app []
[:div
[Clicker]
[Intermediate2 #app-state]])
(r/render
[my-app]
(js/document.getElementById "app"))
With the Intermediate1 component, the message "Component generated!" is displayed on the console log exactly once when the app is started.
Using Intermediate2, the console log shows "Component generated!" every time the Clicker component is clicked.
Adding ^{:key 1} inside Intermediate2 does not change the results:
(defn Intermediate2 [n]
(let [Subcomponent (fn [x] [Displayer x])]
^{:key 1} [Subcomponent n]))
This shows that the Displayer component is being destroyed and generated every time a new value is being sent to Intermediate2, which will trigger a re-rendering. (Or rather, the rendering of a newly created component)
As such, while the cost may not be prohibitive in practice (particularly for generating a small number of simple components), it appears that binding components in a let inside render functions leads to unnecessary component destruction/creation, potentially negating the efficiency benefits of using a React style virtual DOM.
Please read about this link before asking question.
https://github.com/Day8/re-frame/wiki/Creating-Reagent-Components#the-three-ways
A block of data structure or a function return block of data structure will be consider as Form-1. All will be expanded as a single data structure. Any ratom change within this scope will trigger re-render of this single data structure.
Does this cause new child components to be generated every time the render function runs?
Yes. renderChild will be re-created due to the Form-1 nature.
I have defined a renderChild function within the let as a helper function, to avoid duplicating the (get names-vector i) every time I use ChildComponent.
If you want any one of ChildComponent will only be re-render when its own value of (get names-vector i) is changed, but not by the changes in parent or siblings. You should use Form-2, or Form-3. (the names-vector must be a ratom to make reagent to work!)
(defn ChildComponent [names-vector i]
(fn [names-vector i]
[:p (get #names-vector i)]))
(defn ParentComponent [names-vector]
[:div
[ChildComponent names-vector 1]
[ChildComponent names-vector 3]
[ChildComponent names-vector 5]])

Which changes to clojurescript atoms cause reagent components to re-render?

Consider the following reagent component. It uses a ref function, which updates a local state atom, based on the real size of a span element. This is done in order to re-render the component displaying its own size
(defn show-my-size-comp []
(let [size (r/atom nil)]
(fn []
(.log js/console "log!")
[:div
[:span {:ref (fn [el]
(when el (reset! size (get-real-size el))))}
"Hello, my size is:" ]
[:span (prn-str #size)]])))
If the implementation of get-real-size returns a vector, the log message is printed constantly, meaning the component unnecessarily being re-rendered all the time. If it returns just a number or a string, the log appears only twice - as intended in this scenario.
What's the reason for this? Is it maybe that updating an clojure script atom with a new vector (containing the same values though) internally means putting another JavaScript object there, thus changing the atom? Whereas putting a value produces no observable change? Just speculation...*
Anyways - for the real use case, saving the size of the span in a vector would certainly better.. Are there ways to achieve this?
I cam across this, when trying to enhance the answer given in this question.
* since in JS: ({} === {}) // false
I think I have an answer for why vector behaves differently from string/number. Reagent counts a reagent atom as "changed" (and thus updates a component that depends on it) when identical? returns false between the old and the new values. See the subhead "changed?" in this tutorial:
For ratoms, identical? is used (on the value inside the ratom) to determine if a new value has changed with regard to an old value.
However, it turns out that identical? behaves differently for vectors and for strings/ints. If you fire up either a clj or a cljs repl, you'll see that:
(identical? 1 1)
;; true
(identical? "a" "a")
;; true
(identical? [1] [1])
;; false
(identical? ["a"] ["a"])
;; false
If you look at what identical? does here, you'll see that it tests if its arguments are the same object. I think the underlying internal data representation is such that, in clojure, "a" is always the same object as itself, whereas two vectors containing the same value are not the same object as one another.
Confirmation: with ordinary rather than reagent atoms, we can see that string identity is preserved across atom resets, while vector identity is not.
(def a1 (atom "a"))
(let [aa #a1] (reset! a1 "a") (identical? aa #a1))
;; true
(def a2 (atom ["a"]))
(let [aa #a2] (reset! a2 ["a"]) (identical? aa #a2))
;; false
You can work around the problem with a not= check:
(fn [el]
(when el
(let [s (get-real-size el)]
(when (not= s #size)
(reset! size s)))))
I'm not sure what the reason is for why vectors should differ from other values.
Its rerendering like it is supposed to based on how its written. You are derefing the atom in the same function as you are resetting it. I always keep these separate.
(defn span-size [size]
[:span (prn-str #size)])
(defn show-my-size-comp []
(let [size (r/atom nil)]
(fn []
(.log js/console "log!")
[:div
[:span {:ref (fn [el]
(when el (reset! size (get-real-size el))))}
"Hello, my size is:"]
[span-size]])))

How do I loop through a subscribed collection in re-frame and display the data as a list-item?

Consider the following clojurescript code where the specter, reagent and re-frame frameworks are used, an external React.js grid component is used as a view component.
In db.cls :
(def default-db
{:cats [{:id 0 :data {:text "ROOT" :test 17} :prev nil :par nil}
{:id 1 :data {:text "Objects" :test 27} :prev nil :par 0}
{:id 2 :data {:text "Version" :test 37} :prev nil :par 1}
{:id 3 :data {:text "X1" :test 47} :prev nil :par 2}]})
In subs.cls
(register-sub
:cats
(fn [db]
(reaction
(select [ALL :data] (t/tree-visitor (get #db :cats))))))
result from select:
[{:text "ROOT", :test 17}
{:text "Objects", :test 27}
{:text "Version", :test 37}
{:text "X1", :test 47}]
In views.cls
(defn categorymanager []
(let [cats (re-frame/subscribe [:cats])]
[:> Reactable.Table
{:data (clj->js #cats)}]))
The code above works as expected.
Instead of displaying the data with the react.js component I want to go through each of the maps in the :cats vector and display the :text items in html ul / li.
I started as follows:
(defn categorymanager2 []
(let [cats (re-frame/subscribe [:cats])]
[:div
[:ul
(for [category #cats]
;;--- How to continue here ?? ---
)
))
Expected output:
ROOT
Objects
Version
X1
How do I loop through a subscribed collection in re-frame and display the data as a list-item? ( = question for title ).
First, be clear why you use key...
Supplying a key for each item in a list is useful when that list is quite dynamic - when new list items are being regularly added and removed, especially if that list is long, and the items are being added/removed near the top of the list.
keys can deliver big performance gains, because they allow React to more efficiently redraw these changeable lists. Or, more accurately, it allows React to avoid redrawing items which have the same key as last time, and which haven't changed, and which have simply shuffled up or down.
Second, be clear what you should do if the list is quite static (it does not change all the time) OR if there is no unique value associated with each item...
Don't use :key at all. Instead, use into like this:
(defn categorymanager []
(let [cats (re-frame/subscribe [:cats])]
(fn []
[:div
(into [:ul] (map #(vector :li (:text %)) #cats))])))
Notice what has happened here. The list provided by the map is folded into the [:ul] vector. At the end of it, no list in sight. Just nested vectors.
You only get warnings about missing keys when you embed a list into hiccup. Above there is no embedded list, just vectors.
Third, if your list really is dynamic...
Add a unique key to each item (unique amoung siblings). In the example given, the :text itself is a good enough key (I assume it is unique):
(defn categorymanager []
(let [cats (re-frame/subscribe [:cats])]
(fn []
[:div
[:ul (map #(vector :li {:key (:text %)} (:text %)) #cats)]])))
That map will result in a list which is the 1st parameter to the [:ul]. When Reagent/React sees that list it will want to see keys on each item (remember lists are different to vectors in Reagent hiccup) and will print warnings to console were keys to be missing.
So we need to add a key to each item of the list. In the code above we aren't adding :key via metadata (although you can do it that way if you want), and instead we are supplying the key via the 1st parameter (of the [:li]), which normally also carries style data.
Finally - part 1 DO NOT use map-indexed as is suggested in another answer.
key should be a unique value associated with each item. Attaching some arb integer does nothing useful - well, it does get rid of the warnings in the console, but you should use the into technique above if that's all you want.
Finally - part 2 there is no difference between map and for in this context.
They both result in a list. If that list has keys then no warning. But if keys are missing, then lots of warnings. But how the list was created doesn't come into it.
So, this for version is pretty much the same as the map version. Some may prefer it:
(defn categorymanager []
(let [cats (re-frame/subscribe [:cats])]
(fn []
[:div
[:ul (for [i #cats] [:li {:key (:text i)} (:text i)])]])))
Which can also be written using metadata like this:
(defn categorymanager []
(let [cats (re-frame/subscribe [:cats])]
(fn []
[:div
[:ul (for [i #cats] ^{:key (:text i)}[:li (:text i)])]])))
Finally - part 3
mapv is a problem because of this issue:
https://github.com/Day8/re-frame/wiki/Using-%5Bsquare-brackets%5D-instead-of-%28parentheses%29#appendix-2
Edit: For a much more coherent and technically correct explanation of keys and map, see Mike Thompson's answer!
Here's how I would write it:
(defn categorymanager2 []
(let [cats (re-frame/subscribe [:cats])]
(fn []
[:div
[:ul
(map-indexed (fn [n cat] ;;; !!! See https://stackoverflow.com/a/37186230/500207 !!!
^{:key n}
[:li (:text cat)])
#cats)]])))
(defn main-panel []
[:div
[categorymanager2]])
A few points:
See the re-frame readme's Subscribe section, near the end, which says:
subscriptions can only be used in Form-2 components and the subscription must be in the outer setup function and not in the inner render function. So the following is wrong (compare to the correct version above)…
Therefore, your component was ‘wrong’ because it didn't wrap the renderer inside an inner function. The readme has all the details, but in short, not wrapping a component renderer that depends on a subscription inside an inner function is bad because this causes the component to rerender whenever db changes—not what you want! You want the component to only rerender when the subscription changes.
Edit: seriously, see Mike Thompson's answer. For whatever reason, I prefer using map to create a seq of Hiccup tags. You could use a for loop also, but the critical point is that each [:li] Hiccup vector needs a :key entry in its meta-data, which I add here by using the current category's index in the #cats vector. If you don't have a :key, React will complain in the Dev Console. Note that this key should somehow uniquely tie this element of #cats to this tag: if the cats subscription changes and gets shuffled around, the result might not be what you expect because I just used this very simple key. If you can guarantee that category names will be unique, you can just use the :test value, or the :test value, or something else. The point is, the key must be unique and must uniquely identify this element.
(N.B.: don't try and use mapv to make a vector of Hiccup tags—re-frame hates that. Must be a seq like what map produces.)
I also included an example main-panel to emphasize that
parent components don't need the subscriptions that their children component need, and that
you should call categorymanager2 component with square-brackets instead of as a function with parens (see Using [] instead of ()).
Here's an ul / li example:
(defn phone-component
[phone]
[:li
[:span (:name #phone)]
[:p (:snippet #phone)]])
(defn phones-component
[]
(let [phones (re-frame/subscribe [:phones])] ; subscribe to the phones value in our db
(fn []
[:ul (for [phone in #phones] ^{:key phone} [phone-component phone] #phones)])))
I grabbed that code from this reframe tutorial.
Also map is preferable to for when using Reagent. There is a technical reason for this, it is just that I don't know what it is.