On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Shantanu Kumar <kumar.shant...@gmail.com> wrote: >> 81 (defn foo [...] >> 82 (let [x (compute-something ...)] >> 83 (do-something x ...) >> 84 (calculate-whatever ...))) >> >> and you're able to edit lines 82, 83, and 84 but not line 81 (or >> whatever). But I can't see any plausible circumstance where that would >> be the case. > > That's exactly the case. Somebody else owns/maintains `foo` and other > functions/macros that `foo` corresponds with. I am only going to put > in a macro in the body of `foo` in order to provide some value that is > orthogonal to foo's main intent. There are several such functions > (like `foo`) where I have to put in the macro. As I am not the owner > of that code it does not make sense (from maintenance standpoint, > currently) to control the way they are defined. Hope that clarifies.
It still doesn't make sense. If you have permission to edit the function, you have permission to edit the first line of the function. And regardless you could substitute a different version of defn throughout that namespace. -- 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
