On Oct 23, 9:53 am, Rich Hickey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Oct 21, 10:30 am, mb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
On 21 Okt., 14:41, mb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (defmacro doto-
The name is actually also up to discussion. doto is already
in use and this change is incompatible to legacy
On Oct 25, 10:27 am, V.Quixote [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd like some version of doto that works on bare Classes
(defmacro sdoto
Version of doto for use with static methods
[x methods]
`(do
~@(map (fn [m] (list '. x m))
methods)
~x))
Here you go. sdoto for static
I'd like some version of doto that works on bare Classes
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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
To unsubscribe from this group,
On 23 Okt, 16:53, Rich Hickey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Oct 21, 10:30 am, mb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
On 21 Okt., 14:41, mb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (defmacro doto-
The name is actually also up to discussion. doto is already
in use and this change is incompatible to legacy
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 4:53 PM, Rich Hickey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Oct 21, 10:30 am, mb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
On 21 Okt., 14:41, mb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (defmacro doto-
The name is actually also up to discussion. doto is already
in use and this change is incompatible to
On non-backwards compatible language changes in general, isn't it
trivial to write a source-code converter?
Especially given the ease of Clojure's macro system, all you would
need is a systematic find and replace on any code that uses the
current doto right?
That would save the manual labor of
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Rich Hickey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd rather enhance doto to do this and not add another variant. The
break would be that current (doto x (foo 42)) would have to become
(doto x (.foo 42)).
Any thoughts on this as part of the upcoming bit of breaking
On Oct 23, 2008, at 10:53 AM, Rich Hickey wrote:
Any thoughts on this as part of the upcoming bit of breaking changes?
I think it would be a very useful change. I'm in favor.
--Steve
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed
Hi,
recently I ran in the a limitation of doto, that it only invokes
methods. However piping the object with - does not work
also, since it's semantics are more like .. .
I'd like to propose the following chimera of doto and -.
(defmacro doto-
[obj forms]
(let [objx (gensym obj__)]
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 8:41 AM, mb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(doto- (new JFrame Hello, World!)
(.setDefaultCloseOperation JFrame/EXIT_ON_CLOSE)
(miglayout SomeChild :AConstraint MoreChildren ...))
Any thoughts?
Beautiful.
I've found in practice that using doto seems okay at first, but I
Hi,
On 21 Okt., 14:41, mb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(defmacro doto-
The name is actually also up to discussion. doto is already
in use and this change is incompatible to legacy code.
I couldn't come up with a good alternative...
Sincerely
Meikel
On Oct 21, 2008, at 8:41 AM, mb wrote:
I'd like to propose the following chimera of doto and -.
(defmacro doto-
[obj forms]
(let [objx (gensym obj__)]
`(let [~objx ~obj]
(do
~@(map (fn [f]
(if (seq? f)
`(~(first f) ~objx ~@(rest
I like with, that's what JavaScript uses IIRC.
- J.
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 11:10 AM, CuppoJava [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If I understand the macro correctly, it takes an argument, and then
inserts it as the second element into all of the following lists
right?
How about the name with?
Hello Stephen,
On 21 Okt., 17:05, Stephen C. Gilardi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is the .. aspect of it the automatically make a list if it's not
one part?
This is actually a - aspect. What I meant was:
(.. x (getModel) (getRoot) (state))
is equivalent to
(- x .getModel .getRoot .state)
That
On 21 Okt., 17:24, Chouser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't see much wrong with doto-, though do-with or do- might
be okay. I'd probably vote against do-unto-others-as
I would vote for do-with.
+ 1
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you
If I understand the macro correctly, it takes an argument, and then
inserts it as the second element into all of the following lists
right?
How about the name with?
(with obj
(. doSomething)
(. doSomethingElse)
(print stdOut))
I think i'm stealing it from Ruby, but i'm not sure. It's been
I vote for do-with too.
I used to upgrade my Ruby runtime with Ola Bini's Kernel::with.
It could be used exactly the same way as proposed do-with. However,
do-with is more idiomatic name, IMHO.
RK
On 10/21/08, J. McConnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 21 Okt., 17:24, Chouser [EMAIL
+1 for do-with for me as well.
Thank you for considering adding this to Clojure. I actually wrote
this macro myself, but I've always thought it was in the API already
and I just didn't know what it was called.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 11:31 AM, mb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(xxx- Hello (apply str [, World!])) gives Hello, World!.
The is used to mark the hole where the value is to be inserted.
I wrote something like this too. I called mine _ and used _ as the
insert mark.
Here's my
I also thought it was in the language and I just didn't know the name. Good
to see it added!
And do-with sounds like a good name to me.
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 12:33 PM, CuppoJava [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
+1 for do-with for me as well.
Thank you for considering adding this to Clojure. I
Any thoughts?
Awesome! :)
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL
On Oct 21, 5:41 am, mb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It allows the full support of doto via the dot notation of
methods. And it supports on the other hand other functions
not only methods. One example is the new miglayout
interface in clojure-contrib.
Thanks! That's going to be really useful.
Hello,
On 21 Okt., 19:08, Chouser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here's my implementation:
(defmacro _ [ exprs]
(list 'let (apply vector (mapcat (fn [expr] (list '_ expr)) exprs)) '_ ))
Now this is a nice idea.
I used it a couple times after first writing it, but have since failed
to find
23 matches
Mail list logo
