Indeed, it is, in the world of java source files. And indeed, even in the IDEs, it is possible to have both jars in the classpath and then gain the same benefits I myself cited above in the thread.
Maybe I was confused because I made a parallel between java classes <> native platform code (via JIT) and clojure source file <> native java classes. If java classes are not present, clojure behaves as a JIT compiler compiling clojure text source into java classes. There is no equivalent functionality (as far as I know, at least in a standardized way) for distributing native java code along with (or replacing) java classes. So I did not relate the debate "should clojure source files be located in the same jar as their generated classes", because it didn't sound equivalent to me to the problem "should java source files be located in the same jar as their generated classes". Somewhat convoluted, I must confess :-) It seems to me that clojure core already does what you say : a clojure.jar and a clojure-src.jar. But then again, it's just for java source, not clojure source. Maybe clojure-contrib could be aligned to what clojure core does ? -- Laurent 2009/4/7 Paul Stadig <p...@stadig.name> > Isn't it somewhat standard procedure in the Java world (or at least the > Maven world...sorry to bring that up again :)) to distribute with a > clojure-contrib.jar and clojure-contrib-sources.jar, one being only the > compiled classes and the other only being the source files? > > > Paul > > > On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 8:17 AM, BrianS <bstephen...@enclojure.org> wrote: > >> >> I use clojure-contrib quite a bit, and I find a lot of value out of >> having the clj files in the JAR. First, I find it easier to debug a >> project, second there are example CLJ files in the source code on how >> to use the libraries, and those are of great interest, and it is much >> easier to get to these source files from my IDE if they are in the >> JAR. I understand the value a smaller footprint JAR file, so maybe >> there can be a property either set in the ant file or allowed as a >> parameter of the build file to allow someone to build the lightweight >> version of clojure-contrib if needed? Just the point of view of a >> user, not a contributor, of clojure-contrib. >> >> Brian >> >> On Apr 7, 1:37 am, Laurent PETIT <laurent.pe...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > 2009/4/6 Tom Faulhaber <tomfaulha...@gmail.com> >> > >> > > Another question is whether we should duplicate the classes and >> > > the .clj files in the jar or should we just compile all of them. Is >> > > there some value to having the source there? >> > >> > There certainly some value for both scenario : having classes seems an >> > absolute requirement for some libraries to work, but having .clj files >> is >> > really interesting for those that want either (show-source) ... in their >> > REPL to work (or in IDEs for jumping to a read-only syntax-colored >> version >> > of the source file). >> > >> > But there is also certainly value in having a build with just the >> classes ? >> > (Though since the whole thing is open source, it's not a problem related >> to >> > rights, but maybe for some platforms such as Android, some people might >> want >> > the lightest possible jar ?) >> > >> > Regards, >> > >> > -- >> > Laurent >> >> > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
