> There are a very few functions and a few more vars defined only in
> Java code, but that participate in namespaces the normal way and
> therefore don't count as special forms.
>
> One way to find these is to get a list of all the clojure.core vars
> that have no :file metadata:
> (filter #(nil?
Jason, thanks a lot for the tip on "source" macro in
clojure.contrib.repl-utils, it is indeed very nifty!
Resolution for the day: get to know the contrib library!
On Feb 2, 9:48 pm, Jason Wolfe wrote:
> I believe that any non-special-form has a clojure implementation in
> some .clj file, althou
Chouser a écrit :
> What the remaining vars do is a mystery for all but those willing to
> plumb the depths of Clojure's Java sources:
>
> *macro-meta*
> *math-context*
> *use-context-classloader*
>
I can shed some light on one third of this mystery:
*math-context* can be bound to an instance o
On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 9:28 PM, Mark Volkmann wrote:
>
> I understand that special forms are all recognized by the Clojure
> compiler clojure.lang.Compiler. Is it the case that all function and
> macro definitions can be found in some .clj file, whether supplied
> with Clojure or not? Asked anoth
I believe that any non-special-form has a clojure implementation in
some .clj file, although that implementation may simply be a wrapper
for a method in clojure.lang.RT.
Also check out the source macro in clojure.contrib.repl_utils. It's
quite nifty:
user> (source into)
(defn into
"Returns a
I think the special forms list on the Clojure main page lists all the
constructs that are not written in Clojure itself. It seems most everything
else can be found in the .clj files in the src directory. I'm constantly
looking in there when I'm curious how something works or is implemented,
espec
