Hi Meikel, Yes, you're right on full spots, as usual ;-)
But anyway, I don't regret the exercise, very cool ! -- Laurent 2009/5/29 Meikel Brandmeyer <m...@kotka.de>: > Hi Laurent, > > Am 29.05.2009 um 14:21 schrieb Laurent PETIT: > >> I also didn't see whether it was interesting to have the explicit >> defn, I thought that an anonymous function could do the trick. > > It is often desirable to have the driver function available, > because it can be passed around, apply'd, etc. I terribly miss > binding* as a driver for the binding macro, because I had > the need to do the binding dynamically directly providing > the map of Var-value pairs. But there is no binding* in core, > so I have to reimplement it everytime. > > Note, that the naming problem didn't arise in my original > solution, because the name of the driver function was > derived from the final macro name. So two different macros > wouldn't conflict. > > Sincerely > Meikel > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
