On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 3:35 PM, Luke VanderHart
wrote:
> Unless I misunderstand something, (binding...) wouldn't work for this
> because I'd have to wrap all of the code I wanted to be "modified"
> within a (binding...) form. Fine if it's one source file, not so fine
> if I have dozens... Or am I
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 11:29 PM, Amsterda Technology
wrote:
> Very good presentation!
>
> But it's only the begin. Let's motivate the community to participate
> in those meetings.
>
> Clojure, LISP , Distributed Systems and Machine Learning are great
> topics in conputer world. We must cooperate
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 6:20 PM, Kevin Downey wrote:
> use of immigrate is unhygienic and a problem to be solved before you
> go looking for others
>
didn't realize it before. I already started to remove it from code,
and declaring all :uses explicitly.
thanks for the reply.
--
You received th
On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 11:45 AM, Quzanti wrote:
> Thanks Michał
>
> You did understand my intention, and it was the former non-existent
> case I was referring to.
>
> I wanted to attach metadata about type, field arity etc in the
> definition of the record type so that I could write some tools to
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 2:25 AM, j-g-faustus wrote:
> On Jul 8, 5:21 am, Mike Meyer 620...@mired.org> wrote:
>
> So maybe it's best to use the Java convention after all?
> It has been proven to scale, is widely used and plays well with
> whatever else is running on the JVM, which are strong points
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 3:10 PM, James Reeves wrote:
> On 7 July 2010 19:04, David Nolen wrote:
>> So something like this:
>> (defn hello-world [request]
>> (future
>> (Thread/sleep 1)
>> (respond! request
>> {:status 200
>> :headers {"Content-Type" "text/html"}
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 2:55 PM, James Reeves wrote:
> On 7 July 2010 17:24, Laurent PETIT wrote:
>> Of course, if your library has an especially cryptic name (as we have
>> with counterclockwise: ccw), then having also directly foo may also
>> not interfere with other's namespaces. That's the pat
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 2:42 PM, Meikel Brandmeyer wrote:
> Hi,>
> Am 07.07.2010 um 15:47 schrieb Pedro Henriques dos Santos Teixeira:>
>> Are there any design guidelines for choosing between defrecords and
>> defstruct, when one wants a map with type?
>>
>>
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 4:27 AM, Meikel Brandmeyer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Jul 7, 3:37 am, Pedro Teixeira wrote:
>
>> user> (use 'clojure.test)
>> user> (testing (defrecord R []) (new R) )
>>
>> [exception: Unable to resolve classname: R]
>
> I think you get caught by the toplevel form. Clojure compil
