Make accountant secretary-agnostic

[arohner]

I wanted to use accountant, but I use bidi instead of secretary, so I made it un-opinionated about how routing is performed.

[venantius]

Here's a question: is there a way we could make macros for :nav-handler and :path-exists? and then just allow a keyword option? i.e.:

(accountant/configure-navigation! :secretary)

This sort of thing seems to work very well for secretary, but maybe less well with Bidi (since the example functions you provided include references to the global atom in addition to the function).

Maybe we could do something instead of keywords where we chose to do either:

{:router :secretary}

or

{:router :bidi
 :path-exists? (fn [path] ...)
 :nav-handler (fn [path] ...)}

[arohner]

If you're using secretary, there's exactly one way to do it. That's not true in bidi, because bidi is barely more than a pattern matching library. Also note than in bidi, I have to close over app-routes. There are other routers, like silk which are closer in approach to bidi than secretary (pure, functional, unopinionated).

Having to support both :secretary and the manual way is needless sugar, IMO. Also, you'd need a way to conditionally require secretary, so non-secretary users don't pull it into their CLJS builds.

[venantius]

I really like this. I might build in some convenience stuff in the future for people using Secretary, but this is a great first step to making it support multiple routing libraries.