On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 11:56 PM, MarkSwanson <mark.swanson...@gmail.com>wrote:
> I'm curious (general Clojure question) about your use of the quoted > form. The Clojure docs state that this results in an unevaluated form, > but I had trouble finding more details on this. F.E. I'd like to run > count-nodes against a compiled fn that I've previously defined, but I > could not get an existing fn into quoted form - and (count-nodes a-fn) > always returns 1. Is using a macro the only way to get an expression's > unevaluated form? > Basically. Compiled functions don't have source. The clojure.contrib.repl-utils namespace has a (source foo) function, but this relies on .clj files in the classpath so won't work for functions defined at the REPL. It also uses println and returns nil; you'd have to rebind *out* to a pipe and scrape the text that comes out the other end of the pipe. > Do you (or anyone) believe some general guidelines could be gathered > from running count-nodes against all of the individual fns in a > project. F.E. a number > X(?) for a fn means you might be using an > imperative style and should be looking at breaking up the fn or > looking for ways to use map/reduce/other idiomatic Clojure fns to > simplify your code? > I'd expect that to depend on the function's responsibility, but 100 might be a reasonable guideline. Of course, it's sometimes useful to break a function up by using internal letfns in a bigger function -- I have one 300-line function in one project but it's mostly a bunch of internal letfns. The internal functions have no other use so don't need to be top-level, and making them top-level complicates things because a lot of them use the parent function's arguments and some computed values as a context; all of them would gain many more parameters, or else require top-level vars rebound by the parent function. Every time I engage a company for contract work I wonder what I'm in > for ( the same goes when I dive in to another open source project). I > think it's possible that viewing this metric by fn and by file would > give some insight. > Try it and let us all know what you find. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 with your first post. 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
