defn within defn
Hi all. Is it not recommended to use defn within defn? Normal function is faster than the function which has inner function which actually doesn't run. -- (defn aaa1 [] (defn bbb [] 1) 1) (defn aaa2 [] 1) user (time (dotimes [_ 1000] (aaa1))) Elapsed time: 4083.291 msecs nil user (time (dotimes [_ 1000] (aaa2))) Elapsed time: 58.34 msecs nil -- In scheme's case both code have been excuted in the same time. None of clojure code I have seen have inner function. I like inner function because it doesn't consume a name from namespace and make it clear that inner function is only used by outer function. Thanks. -- 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
Re: defn within defn
Hozumi, nested defn's are definitely not recommended. I suggest using letfn for the inner function. Bill Smith Austin, TX On Feb 10, 3:28 pm, Hozumi fat...@googlemail.com wrote: Hi all. Is it not recommended to use defn within defn? Normal function is faster than the function which has inner function which actually doesn't run. -- (defn aaa1 [] (defn bbb [] 1) 1) (defn aaa2 [] 1) user (time (dotimes [_ 1000] (aaa1))) Elapsed time: 4083.291 msecs nil user (time (dotimes [_ 1000] (aaa2))) Elapsed time: 58.34 msecs nil -- In scheme's case both code have been excuted in the same time. None of clojure code I have seen have inner function. I like inner function because it doesn't consume a name from namespace and make it clear that inner function is only used by outer function. Thanks. -- 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
Re: defn within defn
scheme's define is scoped inside a function. clojure is not scheme. clojure's def (which defn uses) is not lexical or scoped in anyway, it always operates on global names. if you want lexical scope please use one of clojure's lexical scoping constructs, let or letfn. On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 1:28 PM, Hozumi fat...@googlemail.com wrote: Hi all. Is it not recommended to use defn within defn? Normal function is faster than the function which has inner function which actually doesn't run. -- (defn aaa1 [] (defn bbb [] 1) 1) (defn aaa2 [] 1) user (time (dotimes [_ 1000] (aaa1))) Elapsed time: 4083.291 msecs nil user (time (dotimes [_ 1000] (aaa2))) Elapsed time: 58.34 msecs nil -- In scheme's case both code have been excuted in the same time. None of clojure code I have seen have inner function. I like inner function because it doesn't consume a name from namespace and make it clear that inner function is only used by outer function. Thanks. -- 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 -- And what is good, Phaedrus, And what is not good— Need we ask anyone to tell us these things? -- 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
Re: defn within defn
Hi, Bill. oh, letfn is what I wanted ! Thank you. Sorry, I missed preview disqussion. letfn - mutually recursive local functions http://groups.google.com/group/clojure/browse_thread/thread/a7aad1d5b94db748 letfn is pretty good. --- (defn aaa1 [] (letfn [(bbb [] 1)] 1)) user (time (dotimes [_ 1000] (aaa1))) Elapsed time: 100.981 msecs nil --- Hi Kevin. I have understood that def is not lexical scoped. --- (defn aaa1 [] (defn bbb [] 1) 1) user (aaa) 1 user bbb #user$aaa1__2324$bbb__2326 user$aaa1__2324$bbb__2...@55eef3c1 --- Thank you! On 2月11日, 午前8:01, Kevin Downey redc...@gmail.com wrote: scheme's define is scoped inside a function. clojure is not scheme. clojure's def (which defn uses) is not lexical or scoped in anyway, it always operates on global names. if you want lexical scope please use one of clojure's lexical scoping constructs, let or letfn. On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 1:28 PM, Hozumi fat...@googlemail.com wrote: Hi all. Is it not recommended to use defn within defn? Normal function is faster than the function which has inner function which actually doesn't run. --- --- (defn aaa1 [] (defn bbb [] 1) 1) (defn aaa2 [] 1) user (time (dotimes [_ 1000] (aaa1))) Elapsed time: 4083.291 msecs nil user (time (dotimes [_ 1000] (aaa2))) Elapsed time: 58.34 msecs nil --- --- In scheme's case both code have been excuted in the same time. None of clojure code I have seen have inner function. I like inner function because it doesn't consume a name from namespace and make it clear that inner function is only used by outer function. Thanks. -- 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 -- And what is good, Phaedrus, And what is not good— Need we ask anyone to tell us these things? -- 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
