On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 00:59:35 -0700 (PDT)
Quzanti wrote:
> Thanks Michał
>
> I suppose this raises a deeper question - should an expression and
> what it evaluates to always be interchangeable in source code?
This is essentially what I was trying to say, stated much more
clearly :)
> On Jul 17,
Thanks Michał
I suppose this raises a deeper question - should an expression and
what it evaluates to always be interchangeable in source code? I
naively assumed it should, but then after reading Kyle's explanation
decided that maybe there is a difference?
On Jul 17, 2:18 am, Michał Marczyk wrot
This is an instance of the broader issue whereby records currently
evaluate to maps. There was a ticket open for that on Assembla. I'm
not sure what's the current status on that, but whenever it gets
fixed, macros will be able to use records in their expansions.
Sincerely,
Michał
--
You received
On Thu, 15 Jul 2010 23:08:27 -0700 (PDT)
Quzanti wrote:
> Kyle
>
> I think I understand what you are saying.
>
> So in practice you should prevent functions called from a macro from
> evaluating the records (using quoting), so that the output is in a
> form that looks like source code should?
>
Kyle
I think I understand what you are saying.
So in practice you should prevent functions called from a macro from
evaluating the records (using quoting), so that the output is in a
form that looks like source code should?
So think it probably is my lack of intuition about macros that is the
pr
On Thu, 15 Jul 2010 08:10:55 -0700 (PDT)
Quzanti wrote:
> Hi
>
> Here is my sorry tale
>
> http://gist.github.com/477069
>
> I am not sure if this could be my misunderstanding of macros or the ~
> idiom
>
> Anyway if you spell out a record structure to a macro then you keep
> the Record infor
I think this is a consequence of the more general problem whereby
records turn into maps when evaluated. There was a ticket for that on
Assembla, not sure about its current status...
Sincerely,
Michał
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
T
Hi
Here is my sorry tale
http://gist.github.com/477069
I am not sure if this could be my misunderstanding of macros or the ~
idiom
Anyway if you spell out a record structure to a macro then you keep
the Record information, even you call a function which spells out the
structure then the records
