> On Nov 21, 10:15 am, Stuart Sierra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Don't know if this is supported now not, but here's my old
> > gen_classes.clj:
...
On Nov 22, 12:19 pm, Rich Hickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And how did you organize the implementation side?
Nothing fancy; one file per (g
On Nov 21, 10:15 am, Stuart Sierra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Nov 21, 8:46 am, Rich Hickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I'd appreciate examples of gen-and-load-class and gen-and-save-class
> > use not well supported by the AOT gen-class.
>
> Don't know if this is supported now not, but
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 03:38:01PM -0500, Stephen Wrobleski wrote:
> Now, I can see a standard way of doing something like this
>
> (defmacro def-gen-class [name & options]
> (let [{:keys [name bytecode]}
> (eval `(gen-class ~(str name) [EMAIL PROTECTED]))]
> (if *compile-files*
>
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 05:46:00AM -0800, Rich Hickey wrote:
> I'd appreciate examples of gen-and-load-class and gen-and-save-class
> use not well supported by the AOT gen-class.
>
> What I am interested in is the scenarios/use-cases.
I've got a DSL which compiles an abstraction to a class. The
On Nov 21, 8:46 am, Rich Hickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd appreciate examples of gen-and-load-class and gen-and-save-class
> use not well supported by the AOT gen-class.
Don't know if this is supported now not, but here's my old
gen_classes.clj:
(defmacro defclass [name & args]
`(do
I'm not entirely clear how the new AOT compilation works, or how I convert
old code to use the new mechanism.
As an example - I had a call to gen-and-save-class in a file that created a
custom exception type just before the function that would throw it was
defined. I've changed that to just gen-cl
On Nov 20, 4:42 pm, Stuart Sierra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Nov 20, 2:14 pm, Stephen Wrobleski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Furthermore, requiring the use of (ns ..) to create a class makes defining a
> > class with a macro somewhat tedious (seems like you'd have to bind *ns*, so
> > t
On Nov 20, 2:14 pm, Stephen Wrobleski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Furthermore, requiring the use of (ns ..) to create a class makes defining a
> class with a macro somewhat tedious (seems like you'd have to bind *ns*, so
> that (ns ..) could mutate it), if even possible.
This is probably tempora
Am I right that now the only way to define a class is to use the AOT
compiler? The :gen-class subform in (ns ...) doesn't work when
running/loading files, only when compiling.
Furthermore, requiring the use of (ns ..) to create a class makes defining a
class with a macro somewhat tedious (seems l
