On Saturday, November 15, 2014 11:31:50 AM UTC-5, Udayakumar Rayala wrote:
>
> twice>
>
> Hi,
>
> Is it idiomatic to have defn inside defn? eastwood throws def-in-def
> warning when I have the following code:
>
> (defn double-square [y]
> (defn square [x] (* x x))
> (+ (square y)
Not idiomatic.
All Eastwood warnings except for one have some documentation explaining
what kinds of things they warn about, and sometimes why they warn about
them. The def-in-def warning documentation is available here:
https://github.com/jonase/eastwood#def-in-def
As it says there, def's i
Not idiomatic. defn is always top level.
David
On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Udayakumar Rayala
wrote:
> twice>
>
> Hi,
>
> Is it idiomatic to have defn inside defn? eastwood throws def-in-def warning
> when I have the following code:
>
> (defn double-square [y]
> (defn square [x] (*
