Added hook-eval-in-project, get-classpath, and apply-task

[dgrnbrg]

hook-eval-in-project is a powerful tool to allow for functionality like lein2's :injections to be made available in lein1 w/ a bit more work. Also, it allows for plugins to invoke the JVM using entirely different code, for instance, to integrate w/ existing proprietary JVM launchers. One example of this is MATLAB, which allows for user code to be put on the classpath.

apply-task make it easy for one task to chain/delegate to another as a subtask.

get-classpath is useful when changing the JVM invocation, so that the new JVM can receive the classpath from all the right places.

[dgrnbrg]

Would it be possible to get feedback or a merge on this? I have a project that depends on these changes that I'd like to distribute, so I may otherwise have to fork and release so that I can release my project.

Thank you!

[tobias]

@dgrnbrg: get-classpath and apply-task look good to me. I'm curious about hook-eval-in-project though - I don't quite understand what it would be used for. Can you provide a better example of its usage?

[dgrnbrg]

One example is here: https://github.com/dgrnbrg/lein-guzheng/blob/master/src/leiningen/guzheng.clj#L97

I needed to have the opportunity to inject some code into every eval-in-project, since the :injections key in the project map is only supported in lein2.

The other place I use this is to support lein2's :eval-in with lein1. I have a leiningen plugin that I use in a proprietary codebase that requires the JVM to invoked through a special wrapper script (which is used to configure LD_LIBRARY_PATH and jvm properties), and the wrapper script doesn't match regular java's argument passing either. So, I need to run a bunch of code to munge the project map into a command line with this java-invocation tool.

Does that clarify my usage scenarios?

[tobias]

Yes, thanks - that makes sense to me. I'm fine with merging this if @sattvik is. Assuming he gives it a thumbs up, would you be willing to add these functions to the README and add a test for hook-eval-in-project?

[sattvik]

On Thu Aug 23 11:01 2012, Tobias Crawley wrote:

Yes, thanks - that makes sense to me. I'm fine with merging this if
@sattvik is. Assuming he gives it a thumbs up, would you be willing to
add these functions to the README and add a test for
hook-eval-in-project?

I think it's fine to include it. If you could please add the
documentation and test, we can pull all these changes in and cut a new
release.

[dgrnbrg]

I've added the tests and updated the README after a long hiatus. Can this be merged now?

Thanks!

[sattvik]

I'll take a look at it this weekend. So long as I don't run into any issues, my goal is to create a new release by Monday.

[dgrnbrg]

Cool -- I haven't changed anything functionally since last month; I just
got swamped at work.

On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Daniel Solano Gómez <
notifications@github.com> wrote:

I'll take a look at it this weekend. So long as I don't run into any
issues, my goal is to create a new release by Monday.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//pull/4#issuecomment-8905875.

[tobias]

Since I've pushed changes that may affect these commits, I'll handle merging them in.

[dgrnbrg]

Could you release a new version of leinjacker? I'd like to incorporate some
of the new features into a plugin I'm working on, and I'd like to release
the plugin as well.

Thanks!

On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 10:21 AM, Tobias Crawley
notifications@github.comwrote:

Since I've pushed changes that may affect these commits, I'll handle
merging them in.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//pull/4#issuecomment-8939868.

[tobias]

@dgrnbrg - I just pushed v0.3.0 to clojars: https://clojars.org/leinjacker

[dgrnbrg]

Thank you!

On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 9:49 AM, Tobias Crawley notifications@github.comwrote:

@dgrnbrg https://github.com/dgrnbrg - I just pushed v0.3.0 to clojars:
https://clojars.org/leinjacker

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//pull/4#issuecomment-9032472.