And of course, that *does* work, thus my complaint was moot, and the symbol non-resolution was probably what Stuart was so aghast about (even though it wasn't my point).
As Michael said: I wish I'd realised that just before posting rather than just after :) On Feb 2, 10:50 am, ataggart <alex.tagg...@gmail.com> wrote: > And of course that should be (require '[clojure.contrib string io]) or > (require ['clojure.contrib 'string 'io]) so the symbols don't try to > get resolved. > > On Feb 2, 10:41 am, ataggart <alex.tagg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Feb 2, 7:05 am, Stuart Sierra <the.stuart.sie...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Feb 2, 2:46 am, ataggart <alex.tagg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On a related note, it is my sincere hope that we get a version of > > > > require and use which no longer require (ha!) the use of quoted > > > > parens. > > > > Absolutely not! Having 'require' as an ordinary function (not a > > > macro) is important for code-generating code. > > > > -SS > > > I don't understand the exclamatory critique. What would be the > > problem with the following actually working (as it similarly does in > > ns)? > > > (require [clojure.contrib string io]) > > > So far as I am aware, it is most idiomatic in clojure to write literal > > collections with vector brackets instead of quoted list parens. I'm > > of the mind that one should prefer vector notation unless one requires > > a list type, or is calling a function, or is emitting code from a > > macro. -- 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
