Thanks Rich,
Expanding into the symbol is clever, but less readable (IMO) than just
expanding into the . form. Anyway, I get it now.
Stuart
> On Feb 15, 2009, at 9:06 AM, Stuart Halloway wrote:
>
>>
>> Does this clarify the point I was making?
>>
>> When writing macros, you cannot dynamically
On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 9:06 AM, Stuart Halloway
wrote:
>
> Does this clarify the point I was making?
>
> When writing macros, you cannot dynamically build one of the syntactic
> sugar forms. For example, you cannot write a macro that expands cls
> and member into (cls/member):
>
> (defmacr
On Feb 15, 2009, at 9:06 AM, Stuart Halloway wrote:
>
> Does this clarify the point I was making?
>
> When writing macros, you cannot dynamically build one of the syntactic
> sugar forms. For example, you cannot write a macro that expands cls
> and member into (cls/member):
>
> (defmacro c
Does this clarify the point I was making?
When writing macros, you cannot dynamically build one of the syntactic
sugar forms. For example, you cannot write a macro that expands cls
and member into (cls/member):
(defmacro call-static [cls member] `(~cls/~member))
-> java.lang.Ex
I just wanted to point out that ' is syntactic sugar for (quote) not (list).
(list) will evaluate your arguments, where as '() will not. So if you try to
use them interchangeable you'll run into trouble.
user> (list 1 2 (+ 1 2))
(1 2 3)
user> '(1 2 (+ 1 2))
(1 2 (+ 1 2))
Its a pretty common lisp
Personally I find that the clearest way to think about macros, is to
treat them like a *very* advanced search-and-replace feature.
Just keep in mind that macros expand into code, and check to make sure
that your generated code is indeed valid code.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~-
Marde, Feb 3, 2009 at 14:24, Konrad Hinsen skribis:
[...]
> I can't think of anything that would be "forbidden" in a macro but
> "allowed" in a plain function. There are many things that don't make
> sense in a macro, of course: launching agents, opening windows, ...
Well, for normal functions y
Thanks Mark, Chouser,
I will update that section of the book with a corrected example in
Beta 7.
Cheers,
Stuart
>
> On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 11:26 AM, Mark Volkmann
> wrote:
>>
>> Now I remember what I was thinking about. This isn't so much a
>> difference between macros and functions as it is
Mark Volkmann wrote:
> I see from the feedback so far that my statements are wrong. However,
> I think it's true that there are *some* things you can do in a
> function that you cannot do in a macro, and perhaps vice-versa. Are
> those clearly documented anywhere? If not, what are some?
You migh
Hi!
Am 03.02.2009 um 17:26 schrieb Mark Volkmann:
> On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 8:24 AM, Konrad Hinsen > wrote:
>>
>> On Feb 3, 2009, at 14:49, Mark Volkmann wrote:
>>
>>> I see from the feedback so far that my statements are wrong.
>>> However,
>>> I think it's true that there are *some* things y
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 11:26 AM, Mark Volkmann
wrote:
>
> Now I remember what I was thinking about. This isn't so much a
> difference between macros and functions as it is a rule about
> something you cannot do in a macro. Quoting from "Programming Clojure"
> ...
>
> "You cannot write a macro tha
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 8:24 AM, Konrad Hinsen wrote:
>
> On Feb 3, 2009, at 14:49, Mark Volkmann wrote:
>
>> I see from the feedback so far that my statements are wrong. However,
>> I think it's true that there are *some* things you can do in a
>> function that you cannot do in a macro, and perha
On Feb 3, 2009, at 14:49, Mark Volkmann wrote:
> I see from the feedback so far that my statements are wrong. However,
> I think it's true that there are *some* things you can do in a
> function that you cannot do in a macro, and perhaps vice-versa. Are
> those clearly documented anywhere? If not
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 7:32 AM, Konrad Hinsen wrote:
>
> On Feb 3, 2009, at 14:01, Mark Volkmann wrote:
>
>> Are the following statements true? They aren't discussed at
>> http://clojure.org/macros, but I think they are true.
>>
>> Macros cannot call other macros during their evaluation, but they
On Feb 3, 2009, at 14:01, Mark Volkmann wrote:
> Are the following statements true? They aren't discussed at
> http://clojure.org/macros, but I think they are true.
>
> Macros cannot call other macros during their evaluation, but they can
> expand to code that calls macros.
Macros can certainly
On Feb 4, 12:01 am, Mark Volkmann wrote:
> Are the following statements true? They aren't discussed
> athttp://clojure.org/macros, but I think they are true.
>
> Macros cannot call other macros during their evaluation, but they can
> expand to code that calls macros.
I don't know, but I'll br
16 matches
Mail list logo
