On Nov 20, 10:33 am, Meikel Brandmeyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 20 Nov., 16:00, Simon Brooke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > And this in turn is because, in core.clj
>
> > (defmacro cond
> > "Takes a set of test/expr pairs. It evaluates each test one at a
> > time. If a test returns logical true, cond evaluates and returns
> > the value of the corresponding expr and doesn't evaluate any of the
> > other tests or exprs. (cond) returns nil."
> > [& clauses]
> > (when clauses
> > (list 'if (first clauses)
> > (second clauses)
> > (cons 'cond (rest (rest clauses))))))
>
> Yes. This is a bug. cond is not a special form, so the
> 'cond in the last line should read `cond basically
> qualifying the symbol. All other macros in clojure.core
> are defined using syntax-quote (hence you get this
> for free) or are correctly quoted, as far as I can tell.
>
cond is fixed in rev 1118.
> However note, that there are special forms like def, do,
> fn, let, etc. which will remain there special meaning.
> More info on:http://clojure.org/special_forms.
>
Right. Currently I don't support the redefinitions of special ops.
Rich
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
