On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 4:36 PM, Stephen C. Gilardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have been thinking recently that "(:refer ...)" would make a good > supported reference argument. Instead of "(:refer-clojure ...)", I suggest > "(:refer ...)" which acts like any other call to refer but doesn't require > its arguments to be quoted. "ns" would still refer to all of clojure if > there is no explicit "(:refer clojure ...)" argument present.
Personally, I'd rather nobody use refer for anything except the 'clojure namespace itself. This would also be an argument against :use. But my opinion seems to be in the minority, so I'll once again drop it until I can find a new excuse for bringing it up again. :-) > :refer (when you know another namespace is already present and you want to > bring some or all of it into this namespace with filters) Is there any reason not to use :use in this case? :use is more robust, as it doesn't rely on your assumption that the namespace is indeed already present. The only namespace I'm aware of that doesn't behave properly with :use is 'clojure, since it's loaded from clojure/boot.clj instead of clojure/clojure.clj. > I like ":refer" over ":refer-clojure" because it's more general and > shorter. Well, it's not really shorter since you'd have to say ":refer clojure" instead of ":refer-clojure". But it is more general, and therefore requires less code to support more cases. If it's useful, I'm fine with it. The only other point I'll bring up is that it may be slightly less surprising for a missing :refer-clojure to automatically refer 'clojure than it would be for the more general :refer to have a special case for the refering of 'clojure if it's not mentioned. > On the subject of shorter, the name "clojure/load" is already in use, but > would be a better name for "load-resources" than "load-resources". I think > we should consider changing the name of the former to something else like > "load-reader" and using "load" for what is now load-resources (and :load for > what is now :load-resources). I have no objection to this. --Chouser --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
