Alice writes:
> I've used those as a debugging tool, and never thought about using it
> inside a macro.
For almost all macros you'll probably ever define, you don't need to
drive macro expansion yourself. You need it only if you have to
transform code that might be anywhere inside the macro's a
This works fine on my box:
foo=> (ns foo (require [clojure.core.async :refer [go !!]]))
nil
foo=> (defmacro foo
#_=> [c]
#_=> `(
foo=> (let [c (chan)]
#_=> (go (prn (foo c)))
#_=> (>!! c :hi))
:hi
nil
foo=>
Timothy Baldridge
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 7:59 AM, Alice wrote:
> I didn't
I didn't have to fully qualify >! because I referred it using :refer. I'm
Sorry if that was not clear.
On Monday, August 5, 2013 10:45:16 PM UTC+9, tbc++ wrote:
>
> Right, so if syntax quote fully qualifies unqualified symbols with the
> current namespace, what good is user/>! to core.async? It
Right, so if syntax quote fully qualifies unqualified symbols with the
current namespace, what good is user/>! to core.async? It has no clue that
you want that to be a put and not something else. So yes, either async/>!
or a fully qualified symbol is what you want here.
Timothy Baldridge
On Mon,
I'm not sure I understand your point. Syntax-quote fully qualifies
unqualified symbols with the current namespace, so it shouldn't be a
problem as long as I don't redefine the >! in the file that defines the
macro. On the other hand, ~'>! would be dangerous because you don't know
what it will b
I've used those as a debugging tool, and never thought about using it
inside a macro.
On Monday, August 5, 2013 8:52:56 PM UTC+9, Tassilo Horn wrote:
>
> Alice > writes:
>
> > I didn't know that macros can do that!
>
> Then you might want to have a look at `macroexpand-1` and `macroexpand`
> f
Your macro is incorrect. Notice what happens to un-namespaced symbols
inside a syntax quote:
(ns 'user)
(macroexpand `(foo))
=>(user/foo)
So your use of >! is getting translated into mynamespace/>!. Core.async
sees your macro and expands it, it just doesn't condsider mynamespace/>! to
be a put!
Alice writes:
> I didn't know that macros can do that!
Then you might want to have a look at `macroexpand-1` and `macroexpand`
from clojure.core and `mexpand-1`, `mexpand`, and `mexpand-all` from
clojure.tools.macro.
Bye,
Tassilo
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to
I didn't know that macros can do that! Thanks for the detailed answer.
On Monday, August 5, 2013 8:00:16 PM UTC+9, Tassilo Horn wrote:
>
> Alice > writes:
>
> > (defmacro foo
> > [c]
> > `( >
> > (let [c (chan)]
> > (go (prn (foo c)))
> > (>!! c :hi))
> >
> > I thought this would n
Hi,
Am Montag, 5. August 2013 12:17:53 UTC+2 schrieb Alice:
>
> (defmacro foo
> [c]
> `(
> (let [c (chan)]
> (go (prn (foo c)))
> (>!! c :hi))
>
> I thought this would not work because foo is expanded after go is
> expanded, so What am I missing?
>
>
I'm not sure what your expectations a
Alice writes:
> (defmacro foo
> [c]
> `(
> (let [c (chan)]
> (go (prn (foo c)))
> (>!! c :hi))
>
> I thought this would not work because foo is expanded after go is expanded,
> so What am I missing?
`go` explicitly macroexpands the form given to it rather than relying on
the standard o
(defmacro foo
[c]
`(!! c :hi))
I thought this would not work because foo is expanded after go is expanded,
so http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Clojure" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop r
12 matches
Mail list logo
