Hi all,
Long time reader, first time poster. Thanks to Rich and the other
contributors for all the great work on Clojure.
I recently had a chance to use Clojure on a non-trivial project, which
required integrating with a number of Java libraries. In the course of
that I was getting tired of swit
Hi all,
Long time reader, first time poster. Thanks to Rich and the other
contributors for all the great work on Clojure.
I recently had a chance to use Clojure on a non-trivial project, which
required integrating with a number of Java libraries. In the course of
that I was getting tired of swit
Hi Phil,
I'd sent this to jochu earlier, but perhaps you can help commit this
minor patch to clojure-mode.
I found a small bug in the regexp used in `swank-clojure-find-
package'. The head version incorrectly parses `ns' forms of the
following kind:
(ns compojure.server.jetty
"Clojure interfac
Did you just need the name of the function? something like this?
>88<
(def ^{:dynamic true} *myself* nil)
(defmacro defn* [name args & body]
`(defn ~name ~args
(binding [*myself* '~name]
~@body)))
(defn* foo [a b] [*myself* (+ a b)])
--
On Wednesday, March 28, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Shantanu Kumar wrote:
>
>
> On Mar 28, 8:57 pm, Ram Krishnan http://gmail.com)>
> wrote:
> > Did you just need the name of the function? something like this?
>
>
> Sorry, I should explained using code what I am looking
Hi all,
I've just released a stable version of `clojurejs' -- an
unimaginatively named Clojure library for translating a Clojure subset
language to Javascript.
clojurejs is something I've been working on for a few weeks as part of
a larger web app in Clojure. The code's a bit crufty (reflects my
On Jan 11, 3:55 am, Daniel Werner
wrote:
> Hi Ram,
>
> your take on Clojure to JS translation seems very interesting to say
> the least. Thanks for sharing your work.
You're very welcome, and thanks for the quick feedback.
> A few points I tripped over while reading the example:
> * Why are func
On Jan 12, 5:56 am, Daniel Werner
wrote:
> On Jan 11, 4:20 pm, Ram Krishnan wrote:
>
> > > * Mozilla's JS 1.7 supports a let statement[1] with lexical scoping,
> > > ...
> > That's an interesting idea, although I'm not too keen on specializing
&g
