Note that letfn does allow recursive bindings, though I couldn't comment as to the implementation details.
On Friday, December 2, 2016 at 3:01:13 PM UTC-5, Paul Gowder wrote: > > Hi clojure-world, > > I think maybe this is actually related to the complexities of binding > referenced in the previous thread ( > https://groups.google.com/forum/?utm_source=digest&utm_medium=email#!topic/clojure/zBXsrqTN2xs)... > > maybe? But it would be amazing if some wise person would help explain... > > So for obscure reasons, I found myself trying to use a naive recursive > fibonacci function interactively. So naturally, the first thing my fingers > went to was: > > (let [fib (fn [x] > (cond > (< x 2) x > :else (+ (fib (- x 2)) (fib (- x 1)))))] > (fib 5)) > > which threw an unable to resolve symbol error because it couldn't resolve > the recursive calls to fib inside the let binding. > > But swap out the let for a def and it works just fine: > > (def fib (fn [x] > (cond > (< x 2) x > :else (+ (fib (- x 2)) (fib (- x 1)))))) > (fib 5) > > Can someone clarify for me what's going on here? Why can a def binding > get access to its own name in the body of a function, but not a let binding? > > thanks! > > -Paul > -- 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 unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
