On Sep 7, 10:23 am, "Stephen C. Gilardi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sep 3, 2008, at 7:11 PM, Rich Hickey wrote:
>
>
>
> >>> On the subject of shorter, the name "clojure/load" is already in
> >>> use, but
> >>> would be a better name for "load-resources" than "load-resources".
> >>> I think
On Sep 3, 2008, at 7:11 PM, Rich Hickey wrote:
>>> On the subject of shorter, the name "clojure/load" is already in
>>> use, but
>>> would be a better name for "load-resources" than "load-resources".
>>> I think
>>> we should consider changing the name of the former to something
>>> else li
On Sat, Sep 6, 2008 at 6:48 PM, Rich Hickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I've applied this patch (SVN rev 1017).
>
> ns should be used in only one file. in-ns should still be used in
> subsidiary files and to change *ns* at the repl.
Also you mentioned in IRC (but not here I think) that ns and
On Sep 6, 7:27 pm, "Stephen C. Gilardi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sep 6, 2008, at 6:48 PM, Rich Hickey wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sep 3, 5:14 pm, Chouser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 4:36 PM, Stephen C. Gilardi
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> I saw some discussion
On Sep 6, 2008, at 6:48 PM, Rich Hickey wrote:
> On Sep 3, 5:14 pm, Chouser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 4:36 PM, Stephen C. Gilardi
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> I saw some discussion of how to fix this on the IRC log but I
>>> can't get on
>>> at the moment.
>>> It
On Sep 3, 5:14 pm, Chouser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 4:36 PM, Stephen C. Gilardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I saw some discussion of how to fix this on the IRC log but I can't get on
> > at the moment.
> > It looks like the current plan is to change "ns" to remove
On Sep 6, 12:23 am, Rich Hickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sep 5, 7:06 am, Christopher Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Hi,
>
> > this is my first post to the list (though I've been lurking for a
> > while) and I'm not yet actively working with Clojure, so take what I
> > say her
On Sep 5, 2008, at 10:08 PM, Stuart Sierra wrote:
> On Sep 5, 2008, at 3:23 PM, Rich Hickey wrote:
>> I didn't think about the plural angle - anyone else bothered by that?
>> The alternative is defnamespace.
>
> Erg. Here, I think shorter is better. Maybe it's only once per file,
> but you stil
On Sep 5, 2008, at 3:23 PM, Rich Hickey wrote:
> I didn't think about the plural angle - anyone else bothered by that?
> The alternative is defnamespace.
Erg. Here, I think shorter is better. Maybe it's only once per file,
but you still have to type it every time you start a new file. If
peopl
On Sep 5, 2008, at 3:23 PM, Rich Hickey wrote:
> I didn't think about the plural angle - anyone else bothered by that?
> The alternative is defnamespace.
I like the clarity of defnamespace over defns. The only knock I see
against defnamespace is its length (in characters). I think that
lengt
On Sep 5, 7:06 am, Christopher Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this is my first post to the list (though I've been lurking for a
> while) and I'm not yet actively working with Clojure, so take what I
> say here with a grain of salt :).
>
> On Sep 4, 2008, at 3:28 PM, Rich Hickey wrot
Hi,
this is my first post to the list (though I've been lurking for a
while) and I'm not yet actively working with Clojure, so take what I
say here with a grain of salt :).
On Sep 4, 2008, at 3:28 PM, Rich Hickey wrote:
> On Sep 3, 7:51 pm, Rich Hickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Sep 3,
On Sep 4, 2008, at 9:28 AM, Rich Hickey wrote:
> After sleeping on it, I think what we have been calling ns should be
> called defns instead, and ns should just set *ns*. Thus there should
> be only one defns for any particular namespace, and (ns foo) can be
> used to set the namespace for a file
On Sep 4, 9:46 am, Chouser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 9:28 AM, Rich Hickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > After sleeping on it, I think what we have been calling ns should be
> > called defns instead, and ns should just set *ns*. Thus there should
> > be only one defns
On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 9:28 AM, Rich Hickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> After sleeping on it, I think what we have been calling ns should be
> called defns instead, and ns should just set *ns*. Thus there should
> be only one defns for any particular namespace, and (ns foo) can be
> used to set
On Sep 3, 7:51 pm, Rich Hickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sep 3, 5:14 pm, Chouser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 4:36 PM, Stephen C. Gilardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
>
> > > I saw some discussion of how to fix this on the IRC log but I can't get on
> > > at t
On Sep 3, 5:14 pm, Chouser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 4:36 PM, Stephen C. Gilardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I saw some discussion of how to fix this on the IRC log but I can't get on
> > at the moment.
> > It looks like the current plan is to change "ns" to remove
On Sep 3, 2008, at 4:59 PM, Chouser wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 4:36 PM, Stephen C. Gilardi
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I have been thinking recently that "(:refer ...)" would make a good
>> supported reference argument. Instead of "(:refer-clojure ...)", I
>> suggest
>> "(:refer .
On Sep 3, 6:09 pm, "Michael Reid" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > Good point. It seems that :use would suffice except if both of the following
> > are true for a particular namespace:
> > - it's defined outside of a lib,
> > - it's reasonable to want to refer to it.
>
> > I'm not aware of
On Sep 3, 4:59 pm, Chouser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 4:36 PM, Stephen C. Gilardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I have been thinking recently that "(:refer ...)" would make a good
> > supported reference argument. Instead of "(:refer-clojure ...)", I suggest
> > "(:re
Hi,
> Good point. It seems that :use would suffice except if both of the following
> are true for a particular namespace:
> - it's defined outside of a lib,
> - it's reasonable to want to refer to it.
>
> I'm not aware of any uses of namespaces that meet both of those criteria.
> Does anyone else
On Sep 3, 2008, at 4:59 PM, Chouser wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 4:36 PM, Stephen C. Gilardi
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> :refer (when you know another namespace is already present and you
>> want to
>> bring some or all of it into this namespace with filters)
>
> Is there any reason
On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 4:36 PM, Stephen C. Gilardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I saw some discussion of how to fix this on the IRC log but I can't get on
> at the moment.
> It looks like the current plan is to change "ns" to remove the sensitivity
> to "the namespace is already defined" and add "(
On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 4:36 PM, Stephen C. Gilardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have been thinking recently that "(:refer ...)" would make a good
> supported reference argument. Instead of "(:refer-clojure ...)", I suggest
> "(:refer ...)" which acts like any other call to refer but doesn't requ
ect of shorter, the name "clojure/load" is already in use,
but would be a better name for "load-resources" than "load-resources".
I think we should consider changing the name of the former to
something else like "load-reader" and using "load"
I think there's a problem with the new clojure/ns and gen-and-save-
class.
Suppose you define:
(clojure/ns com.example
(:use clojure.contrib.pred))
(defn MyClass-close [this]
(println "Hello, World!"))
And you generate a .class file with:
(gen
26 matches
Mail list logo
