On Mar 13, 2013, at 09:52, Ambrose Bonnaire-Sergeant wrote: > How useful is a fully macroexpanded AST to Codeq?
Let's decomplect this question a bit, eg: * How useful is an AST to Codeq? Rich Hickey's Clojure analyzer only harvests def* and ns forms. So, for example, it says nothing about symbols used in a defn. An AST could add a lot of information to the database, but I'm not at all sure which facts would be useful. That said, I'd be inclined to err on the side of having too many facts, at least for early experimentation. * How does macro expansion affect the utility? Just as it might be interesting to know what symbols a defn uses, it might be useful to know what macros it calls. > There are line numbers associated with the AST nodes, and > column numbers if you're using Clojure 1.5.0+. How do these line and column numbers relate to the original code? For example, how doe macro expansion affect them? -r -- http://www.cfcl.com/rdm Rich Morin http://www.cfcl.com/rdm/resume r...@cfcl.com http://www.cfcl.com/rdm/weblog +1 650-873-7841 Software system design, development, and documentation -- -- 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 --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
