Hi I don't really get namespaces, and, yes, I looked at http://clojure.org/namespaces . . . but was lost at "interned" (thinking about this more, I think I know what it means ... perhaps a link to a definition would work). Is it like C++ where it doesn't matter what subdirectory a file is in ... unlike java where the subdirectory must match the package? Another thing that makes the package concept simple to me is that you can explain it in a few sentences. You put things in folders that are packages. To access the code in packages, you use import. Things in the same package can see each other if there isn't a private qualifier.
here, I see "require" and "use" and "load" and "ns" and "in-ns" and "refer" . .. oh and "import" to get java stuff, and I don't know what else. This is sort of why I've been watching the IDE progress so whoever figures out how that part works can make it happen automatically for me. I guess it's just not the fun part about what draws me to clojure, but I'm coming to realize that I should try to gain an appreciation for it. Otherwise I'll have to make all my code live in a single file ... which isn't so nice to version control I suppose. I dunno, let's start with that. What's the harm in putting all the code in one file? Can you have as many namespaces in a file as you want? Can you reopen namespaces like you can in C++ and add more code to them? Let's start with the problem we are trying to solve . . . give an appreciation for why clojure namespaces are somehow really slick . . . I mean, I get how they allow you to use (def) on the same symbol more than once. That's the same thing as C++. But in C++ that has nothing to do with how things compile in terms of the physical file hierarchy. Is that the same thing here? This is probably an easily resolved question, so sorry that I'm being lazy, but, hey, I'll represent the lazy population that you want to get hooked on clojure . . .browses through all the myriad languages to chose from . .. gets to the page that starts with "mapping ...interned", and goes, "too hard". And if that sounds lame, well, I think there's something to think about. I'm interested in higher level languages so that the banal details (and boilerplate) can just happen, right? That's the whole argument of being thread safe, etc. by the way, I checked out: http://bc.tech.coop/blog/081029.html . . . .and still didn't really feel like folks were getting to the "why do I care" part of it, first. I feel free mentioning that because Bill asked for feedback. Finally, I'm happy to visit this question for myself later if I'm being a pain. Perhaps a reread or two and checking out people's projects more, and I'll get it. Thank you for your patience and help. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
