defn (actually def, as defn is just a macro wrapping it) is always global,
no matter where it appears.

It is usually considered bad form to have a def outside the top level,
though there are exceptions.

On Saturday, 15 November 2014, Udayakumar Rayala <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Is it idiomatic to have defn inside defn? eastwood throws def-in-def
> warning when I have the following code:
>
> (defn double-square [y]
>         (defn square [x] (* x x))
>         (+ (square y) (square y)))
>
> The above code is a simplified example to show the problem. In the above
> case, square is a function which is local and I dont want it to be shared
> outside the context of double-square.
>
> I can change it to use letfn like below:
>
> (defn double-square [y]
>         (letfn [(square [x] (* x x))]
>                 (+ (square y) (square y))))
>
> But when you have multiple local functions, it doesnt seem nice to read.
>
> - Uday.
>
> --
> Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with
> your first post.
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "ClojureScript" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected] <javascript:;>.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
> <javascript:;>.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript.
>

-- 
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your 
first post.
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"ClojureScript" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript.

Reply via email to