How about this: Symbols in namespaces are optionally organized into groups. The vehicle might be something as simple as a :group metadata entry on the symbols. When symbols from other namespaces are referred, new local copies are created with :group metadata equal to the namespace name. When referring symbols, you can then specify a group mask with :only-groups and :exclude-groups to compliment the current :only and :exclude features.
-Per On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 11:28 AM, Per Vognsen <per.vogn...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 10:30 AM, falcon <shahb...@gmail.com> wrote: >> 1. core.clj is a gigantic library with more than 400 function >> definitions (378 defns and 62 defmacros to be exact). I didn't expect >> to find sequence related functions, such as map/reduce in core. >> Doesn't it make sense to move functions to more 'domain-specific' >> libraries...even if core.clj eventually imports all these libraries >> and exposes them as if they were all in the same library? > > My preference would be much tighter subdivision of functionality into > libraries, but with an enlarged set of auto-imports compared to what > we have today, encompassing much of what is currently in the > seq-utils, str-utils and duckstreams contrib libraries. We would need > to add namespace functionality for excluding such auto-imports on a > per-library basis, similar to the way that :exclude currently works on > a per-symbol basis. > > -Per > -- 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
