Re: special forms and let binding

2010-05-31 Thread alux
Hi Аркадий, I started another thread about the difference between special form and macros today - and got told that it is not possible to overwrite a special form. Regards, alux On 31 Mai, 21:15, "Ark. Rost" wrote: > So I don't understand if there any way do it. I'm really curious about > it.

Re: special forms and let binding

2010-05-31 Thread Ark. Rost
So I don't understand if there any way do it. I'm really curious about it. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient

Re: special forms and let binding

2010-05-31 Thread Аркадий Рост
In fact, keywords are not symbols. So thats why you were wrong. You can read about in on the page http://clojure.org/lisps -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts f

Re: special forms and let binding

2010-05-30 Thread alux
Hello ataggart, thank you for the correction! Only now I understand A.Rosts question. May be somebody can help, and explain why my hypothesis was wrong. Obviousely, while functions are first class, special forms are even "better", kind of zeroth class. Thank you, alux On 31 Mai, 04:15, ataggart

Re: special forms and let binding

2010-05-30 Thread ataggart
On May 30, 12:45 pm, alux wrote: > Hi A., > > I dont completely understand what you refer to with "works correct". > > You define a local variable, named do, and use it.  That works of > course. Btw you may use it without the call to var > (def do println) > (do "example") It only appears to "w

Re: special forms and let binding

2010-05-30 Thread alux
Hi A., I dont completely understand what you refer to with "works correct". You define a local variable, named do, and use it. That works of course. Btw you may use it without the call to var (def do println) (do "example") In let you may do (let [do println] (do :plop)) Is this what you want

special forms and let binding

2010-05-30 Thread A.Rost
Hi! For example, it's possible to do things like: (def do println) ((var do) "example") And it works correct. But I don't understand how to get the same behavior in let bindings. I mean (let [do println] ..) what can I write to get the same results? -- You received this message