On Mar 29, 5:50 pm, Cedric Greevey <cgree...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 11:48 PM, Shantanu Kumar > > <kumar.shant...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> If you control the third line of: > > >> (defn foo [x y] > >> (let [z (bar y (next x))] > >> (println "Done in " (find-name) ".") > >> (* 4 z (count x)))) > > >> then don't you control the first? > > > Cedric – Unfortunately, no. The target is pre-written code that may > > have been created using (1) clojure.core/defn or (2) several `defxyz` > > kind of macros already. Injecting a macro that internally uses `find- > > name` is something I can do, hence this need. > > If you can replace some other macro that code's source uses, surely > you can also replace defn? You'd need to inject the clojure.core/defn > wrapper into the other function's namespace, but you'd have to do that > with the other macro anyway.
Cedric – I meant "inject" as in into the body, not to alter/wrap the macro itself that defines the function. So, effectively I alter/wrap neither of `defn` and `defxyz` macros. Sun – I see your point but the functions are pre-written and quite interwoven. I cannot change the way functions are invoked. Shantanu -- 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
