On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 9:28 AM, Rich Hickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > After sleeping on it, I think what we have been calling ns should be > called defns instead, and ns should just set *ns*. Thus there should > be only one defns for any particular namespace, and (ns foo) can be > used to set the namespace for a file and/or change the namespace at > the repl. > > Thoughts?
The other def's have no impact on the state except for the name they're defining -- will defns also change *ns*? At the very least it may cause other namespaces to be created (via :require for example). The other def's, if repeated, fully replace the old definition with the new one -- will defns do that, or will it just add any new namespaces and aliases to any that already exist? Maybe those are comments about the name more than the functionality. Is there really any harm in re-refering 'clojure if ns (or defns) is run a second time on the same namespace? --Chouser --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
