I don't see there's a way to eliminate out most parenthesis like this
either. Maybe you can try to spit them out to somewhere and then read them
back again...but you probably don't want to do this. ;-)
在 2012年8月21日星期二UTC+8下午11时00分31秒，Maris写道：
>
>
> Nothing is wrong with do block.I just thoug
Nothing is wrong with do block.I just thought maybe there is some
trick
Fair enough.
On Tuesday, 21 August 2012 15:55:04 UTC+1, lpetit wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> What's wrong with having 2 fns inside the top level do ?
>
> In Clojure, top level dos are split so that their children forms ar
Hello,
What's wrong with having 2 fns inside the top level do ?
In Clojure, top level dos are split so that their children forms are
evaluated in sequence, as if you would have written them without the do.
HTH,
--
Laurent
2012/8/21 Maris
> I want a macro that generates two defn's.
>
> (defn
What speaks against two defns in a do. It works as if you write two defns
in normal code. Actually I find this very useful to do because you don't
have additionally complexity for returning multiple sexps
Am 21.08.2012 16:42 schrieb "Maris" :
> I want a macro that generates two defn's.
>
> (defn v
