Workaround:
(do (def foo (build-something-enormous)) nil)
As for the reason for this behaviour -- probably non other than it's
just the easiest thing for def in ClojureScript to do; "it" being to
inherit the return value from the JavaScript assignment def compiles
to.
Sticking a void () around the assignment (so that (def foo ...) would
do what (js* "void (~{})" (def foo ...)) does currently) would be a
straightforward way of suppressing the returned value. I can put
together the (trivial) patch to do that in :statement context in the
presence of a flag if this seems useful. The REPL could just set this
flag by default.
Sincerely,
Michał
On 15 May 2012 06:14, kovas boguta <kovas.bog...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think this is a pretty valid feature request.
>
> The main question is, can this be done without having vars in clojurescript.
>
> One way to do it is to surpress output somehow, under certain conditions.
>
> Either as a token at the end of a repl input, or in the semantics of def
> itself.
>
> I don't have an ideal specific solution here, but I've noticed this
> problem as well and found it pretty annoying.
>
> There should be a way to solve it that is a reasonable compromise.
>
>
>
> On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 11:13 PM, Mark Engelberg
> <mark.engelb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 4:41 PM, David Nolen <dnolen.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 7:27 PM, Mark Engelberg <mark.engelb...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> (def tree (function-that-produces-an-enormous-tree 2))
>>>
>>>
>>> Isn't doing this at the top level bad form?
>>
>>
>> The purpose of a REPL is for interactive experimentation. I want to give
>> names to the things I'm building so I can play with them in the REPL.
>> Nothing bad form about that.
>>
>>>
>>> Also I don't see how this isn't solved by modifying some habits.
>>>
>>> (defn test-tree [] (function-that-produces-an-enormous-tree 2))
>>> (time (test-tree))
>>>
>>
>> time prints out the value that is computed. The above example would suffer
>> the same problem of printing out the tree at the REPL. You could do
>> something like (time (do (test-tree) nil)) to suppress printing, but if you
>> want to do further interactive manipulations to the tree, you'd end up
>> recomputing it. So then, you get into workarounds involving delay. It
>> starts to get ugly, I think.
>>
>> Clojure's ability to give names to things without printing the values is a
>> feature I use every day in my interactive explorations.
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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
>
> --
> 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
--
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
