On Jan 11, 4:20 pm, Ram Krishnan <kriyat...@gmail.com> wrote: > > * Mozilla's JS 1.7 supports a let statement[1] with lexical scoping, > > ... > That's an interesting idea, although I'm not too keen on specializing > for any one browser. The other problem is I don't see any reasonable > way of providing the alternates from a web server without some form of > user-agent sniffing.
You're right, any potential benefits could only be reaped under very specific circumstances. Making the codebase more complex to optimize for these limited cases doesn't make sense. I've taken a deeper look yesterday and am positively surprised how much easier to understand the implementation is than expected. Very cool. A few design decisions caught my eye though, and could IMO be improved: Using a ref won't actually improve your concurrency experience with *macros* (provided I understand your code correctly). Since the parsing and emitting is written in an inherently linear style, there will only ever be one transaction altering *macros*. More problematic though is the case where two threads happen to concurrently translate completely independent (js ...) expressions. Since *macros* is global, both threads would share the same macro definitions even if totally different code bases are being translated! This problem could be mitigated by using thread local bindings for *macros*. Refs or atoms are not neccessary in this case; even plain old (set!) would do. Another thing that strikes me as a potentially bad idea is the reliance on imperative behaviour to generate output, i.e. "emitting" or "printing" generated code to a stream instead of returning the pieces in a functional way and combining them afterwards. This imperative style could hamper your code's composability in the future. ... What do others think? With all that said -- it's actually quite pleasant to work with right now. If you're interested in patches, I've done some small refactorings to remove duplicate code, added basic docstring support and other small fixes. Please see my fork at: https://github.com/danwerner/clojurejs Daniel -- 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
