On Dec 8, 12:05 pm, Aaron Cohen <aa...@assonance.org> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 2:40 PM, javajosh <javaj...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I was looking at quote. > > > user=> (quote 1) > > 1 > > user=> (quote) > > nil > > user=> (quote quote) > > quote > > user=> ((quote quote) 1) > > nil > > > It's the last result that confuses me. I would have expected the > > result to be "1" - e.g. the same as (quote 1). I figured I'd try quote > > on something other than itself, and it just got stranger: > > > user=> ((quote +) 1 2) > > 2 > > > I would have expected 3. > > 1) quote is a special form, so it's probably a bad symbol to be > experimenting with in this way, let's use "+" instead. > > 2) This is kind of funny, (quote +) returns a symbol, not a ref > holding the function. When you invoke it, you're actually calling the > invoke method of the Fn implentation of the Symbol class, whose > behavior is to look itself up in the first parameter (intended to be a > collection), similar to how keywords look themselves up.
That almost kinda sort makes sense to me. I'm not sure whether to be pleased or scared. > Once you get a symbol, if you want to actually call it the way you > were originally, try "resolve" amongst probably other ways. > > user=> (resolve '+) > #'clojure.core/+ > > user=> ((resolve '+) 1 2) > 3 Cool! -- 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
