On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Paul Stadig <p...@stadig.name> wrote:
> I may be missing something, but how does having to (declare) vars fix > typos? I don't think anyone is suggesting *creating* a var that is > referenced before it is defined. What people are asking for is that the > compiler looks-ahead to verify that the var will eventually be defined, and > then go on its merry way. Typos would still be discovered, and people > wouldn't have to stop and (declare). > Yeah I wasn't suggesting that vars should be created, sorry if it sounded like I was (I mentioned declare because this came up in another thread about declare and someone had hacked the reader to not bail immediately on undefined symbols). In CL, if you have definitions out of order in the compiler will issue warnings. > > I'm not saying it's an easy change... > > > Paul > > On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 3:45 PM, David Nolen <dnolen.li...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> This has come up before. You can actually work around this (search the >> mailing list for declare) >> I think that when not hacking against the REPL that the default behavior >> is a good one. Having to use declare bugged me a little at first, but I now >> consider it a very minor annoyance compared to the advantages I get from >> programming interactively with Clojure. >> Should the REPL have an "interactive" mode where it won't fire an >> exception on undefined symbols and instead issue compiler warnings? If >> compiler warnings were issued this would be a nice hook for Emacs and other >> IDEs. >> David >> > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
