Re: why a defn- but not a def- ?

2009-11-17 Thread Jonathan Smith
On Nov 14, 1:50 pm, John Harrop wrote: > On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 8:55 AM, Albert Cardona wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 11:26 PM, Mike Hogye > > wrote: > > > Why is there an easy way to def a private function (defn-), but no > > > similarly easy way to def an arbitrary var as private? > > >

Re: why a defn- but not a def- ?

2009-11-17 Thread Wojciech Kaczmarek
On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 14:55, Albert Cardona wrote: > On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 11:26 PM, Mike Hogye wrote: >> Why is there an easy way to def a private function (defn-), but no >> similarly easy way to def an arbitrary var as private? > > > The way I see it, def- would encourage gratuitous variab

Re: why a defn- but not a def- ?

2009-11-14 Thread John Harrop
On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 8:55 AM, Albert Cardona wrote: > On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 11:26 PM, Mike Hogye > wrote: > > Why is there an easy way to def a private function (defn-), but no > > similarly easy way to def an arbitrary var as private? > > > The way I see it, def- would encourage gratuitous

Re: why a defn- but not a def- ?

2009-11-14 Thread Albert Cardona
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 11:26 PM, Mike Hogye wrote: > Why is there an easy way to def a private function (defn-), but no > similarly easy way to def an arbitrary var as private? The way I see it, def- would encourage gratuitous variable declaration imperative style. By private var what one mean