Yes, the name and semantics of aspects fits for it more. I like that. I am
going to sign up for contributing soon.
I am low on time currently, so feel free to extend this idea further. As
soon as Rich gets agreement, you can use it :-)
Frantisek
--~--~-~--~~~---~
On Aug 31, 2008, at 4:34 AM, Frantisek Sodomka wrote:
> To extend this idea little further, lets define "code sections":
I like the idea a lot. I believe the "Aspect oriented programming"
folks call these kinds of "outside the main flow" items "aspects". I
think it would be good to have aspe
I found that Rich wrote a simple tracing facility:
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure/browse_frm/thread/fd315d9dfdb8c32c/7479682cdf3a1b97
What I had in mind is to literally turn on and off parts of code. This way
I can play with design by contract:
(def *section-tags* {:require true})
(de
Hello Parth,
(defn print-decorate [f]
(fn [& args]
(println (:name (meta (var f))) "called with" args)
(apply f args)))
f is not a toplevel binding, but only a local variable. This is the
issue here,
I think. Please try the following.
(defn print-decorate [f]
(fn [& args]
(pri
Frantisek Sodomka wrote:
> Hello!
> It is very common pattern to include parts of code which are used for
> specific purposes - for example debugging, logging, etc. While these parts
> can be used when developing code, they can be removed from finished
> application. One way is to comment these
Hello!
It is very common pattern to include parts of code which are used for
specific purposes - for example debugging, logging, etc. While these parts
can be used when developing code, they can be removed from finished
application. One way is to comment these parts out, when we are done.
