Hi, On 11 Okt., 11:44, Laurent PETIT <laurent.pe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I guess one should use "mapping" instead of "binding". The var is mapped to > the symbol "foo" in the namespace *ns*. > > I'm saying that because functions for inspecting namespaces are (ns-map), > etc. In a determined attempt to increase confusion, I would like to throw another interpretation into the ring. Vars are not connected to symbols at all. They happen to get a name. When a unqualified symbol is read by the reader, it is resolved in the current namespace to the Var with the same name. So a symbol itself has no connection to any Var. I would consider the actual map just an implementation detail. The same could be achieved by a list of Vars which is walked to find the required one. (with a different performance, of course) So I would say: "Unqualified symbols in the namespace the def happened in will resolve to the def'd Var." (of course only after the def happened!) Sincerely Meikel -- 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
