On Nov 27, 5:46 pm, Richard Newman wrote:
>
> I don't support the view that it's OK for programmers to not know what
> they're doing, which in this case means knowing that 'foo reads as
> (quote foo).
FWIW I *strongly* agree; getting reader macros straight in my head was
a *big* help in macro wri
Stefan Kamphausen writes:
>> (meta '#^{a 1} greet)
>
> To be honest, I think it looks even worse. There is some reader macro
> which by happy accident works in a certain way together with the other
> read syntax. No, I don't think it should work.
I agree this is ugly and unintuitive and I wo
> Whoa! Cool example. This is rather an important point, I think. I
> mean it's not important, when your "only" programming with Clojure,
> which will usally work, and you always have the REPL... But it
> becomes more important for those, trying to understand. It's about
> grokking a language'
Hi,
On Nov 27, 11:06 pm, "Alex Osborne" wrote:
> > A *new* symbol? I would have thought I'm getting the original symbol
> > again.
>
> Yes, one of the differences between symbols and keywords is that symbols
> are created fresh each time while keywords are interned:
>
> (identical? 'foo 'foo) ;
Stefan Kamphausen writes:
>> I don't think the documentation is *wrong* per se, it just only seems to
>> cover the immutable types.
>
> Which is kind of wrong, isn't it? I strongly believe that this should
> be changed.
Indeed.
> While I understand that the mutating functions will not apply to
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 1:23 PM, John Harrop wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Richard Newman wrote:
>
>> > Maybe this ought to be fixed; i.e., if the reader sees #^{meta} 'foo
>> > it applies the metadata to foo first, then quotes it, resulting in
>> > the same thing as (quote #^{meta}
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Richard Newman wrote:
> > Maybe this ought to be fixed; i.e., if the reader sees #^{meta} 'foo
> > it applies the metadata to foo first, then quotes it, resulting in
> > the same thing as (quote #^{meta} foo).
>
> Why introduce that special case, when you can sim
> Maybe this ought to be fixed; i.e., if the reader sees #^{meta} 'foo
> it applies the metadata to foo first, then quotes it, resulting in
> the same thing as (quote #^{meta} foo).
Why introduce that special case, when you can simply do the second?
I don't support the view that it's OK for p
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 8:45 AM, Stefan Kamphausen
wrote:
> > Why? Well because #^ attaches the metadata to the next read form.
> > What's the next read form? It's 'greet. But in fact 'greet is just
> > sugar for (quote greet). So we're actually affixing the metadata to a
> > list containing t
Hi,
On Nov 27, 2:45 pm, Stefan Kamphausen wrote:
> A *new* symbol? I would have thought I'm getting the original symbol
> again.
If you get back the original symbol back, it can't carry metadata...
> Definitely, and I don't like the distinction too much either.
But it makes sense. A Var rep
Hi,
On Nov 27, 10:19 am, Stefan Kamphausen wrote:
> As far as the documentation says, Vars can't have metadata:
>
> "Symbols and collections support metadata," --http://clojure.org/metadata
>
> "Symbols, Lists, Vector, Sets and Maps can have metadata"
> --http://clojure.org/reader
>
> I tried t
Hi,
that have been some really embarrassing typos in my post (typing too
fast in too stupid an interface, I think).
On Nov 27, 12:52 pm, "Alex Osborne" wrote:
> Stefan Kamphausen writes:
> > On Nov 8, 3:46 am, Alex Osborne wrote:
> > As far as the documentation says, Vars can't have metadata:
Stefan Kamphausen writes:
> On Nov 8, 3:46 am, Alex Osborne wrote:
> As far as the documentation says, Vars can't have metadata:
>
> "Symbols and collections support metadata," -- http://clojure.org/metadata
>
> "Symbols, Lists, Vector, Sets and Maps can have metadata" --
> http://clojure.org/re
Hi Alex,
first of all thank your this exhaustive explanation.
I still don't get some things, though, and kindly ask for more
enlightenment.
On Nov 8, 3:46 am, Alex Osborne wrote:
> So after resolving, it then has a Var object. A Var, is as it's
> name suggests, a variable. It consist of a nam
Hi Alex,
Wow! Thank you so much for this excellent explanation! It totally
makes sense now :-)
S.
On 2009-11-07, at 9:46 PM, Alex Osborne wrote:
>
> Stefan Arentz wrote:
>
>> I must admin that I don't fully understand the difference between foo
>> and #'foo. That is probably why I'm making
Stefan Arentz wrote:
> I must admin that I don't fully understand the difference between foo
> and #'foo. That is probably why I'm making this beginner mistake :-)
The difference takes some explanation. So without further ado...
Functions and Metadata: in Vivacious Gory Detail
==
On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 8:34 PM, Stefan Arentz wrote:
> On 2009-11-07, at 8:28 PM, John Harrop wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 8:04 PM, Stefan Arentz
> > wrote:
> > But I'm using this in a bigger macro that takes a bunch of functions
> > as a parameter. Is there a way to make this work or sho
On 2009-11-07, at 8:28 PM, John Harrop wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 8:04 PM, Stefan Arentz
> wrote:
> But I'm using this in a bigger macro that takes a bunch of functions
> as a parameter. Is there a way to make this work or should I
> 'translate' the functions that I take by name with (va
On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 8:04 PM, Stefan Arentz wrote:
> But I'm using this in a bigger macro that takes a bunch of functions
> as a parameter. Is there a way to make this work or should I
> 'translate' the functions that I take by name with (var foo)?
You'll need to translate the symbols into va
Another one related to my previous question about meta-data.
user> (defn #^{ :xxx 1} foo [] "foo")
#'user/foo
user> (defn #^{ :xxx 2} bar [] "bar")
#'user/bar
I need to do something similar to this:
user> (map #(:xxx (meta %)) [foo bar])
(nil nil)
Basically accessing the meta data of a functio
20 matches
Mail list logo
