I also wish that the name was visible... I wrote the macro a few days ago:
macro expose_name(fdef)
@capture(fdef, begin function fname_ (args__) body__ end end)
esc(:(function $(fname) ($(args...))
let function_name = $(Expr(:quote, fname))
$(body...)
end))
end
@expose_name function foo () @show function_name end
Cédric
On Wednesday, August 5, 2015 at 12:54:38 PM UTC-4, Tim Holy wrote:
>
> Alternatively,
>
> julia> for (offset, f) in enumerate((:foo1, :foo2, :foo3))
> @eval begin
> function $f(x)
> println("This is ", $f)
> x + $offset
> end
> end
> end
>
> julia> foo1(0)
> This is foo1
> 1
>
> julia> foo2(0)
> This is foo2
> 2
>
> julia> foo3(0)
> This is foo3
> 3
>
> --Tim
>
> On Wednesday, August 05, 2015 12:48:29 PM Isaiah Norton wrote:
> > Can I ask what is your use-case, and whether you've done this in some
> other
> > language? From a quick google there are appear to be some (possibly
> > non-standard) C and C++ compiler defines that provide the current
> function
> > name, but other than that:
> >
> > - Python rejected a PEP for this feature (
> > https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3130/)
> > - Java does not support it in a first-class way ("could use stacktrace,
> but
> > potentially unreliable")
> > - some lisps appear to have interactive mode support for this kind of
> > introspection, but nothing general.
> >
> > The recommended way to solve problems that require this level of
> > introspection is to do code generation via metaprogramming.
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 12:36 PM, Isaiah Norton <[email protected]
> <javascript:>>
> >
> > wrote:
> > > No.
> > >
> > > Ok, technically, you could do this (inspired by
> > > https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/8066#issuecomment-61136584):
>
> > >
> > > julia> function foo()
> > >
> > > bt = backtrace()
> > > lookup = ccall(:jl_lookup_code_address, Any, (Ptr{Void},
> Int32),
> > >
> > > bt[2], 0)
> > >
> > > name = lookup[1]
> > > end
> > >
> > > foo (generic function with 1 method)
> > >
> > > julia> foo()
> > >
> > > :foo
> > >
> > > But that is a really, really bad idea. Please don't do that.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Dominique Orban <
> > >
> > > [email protected] <javascript:>> wrote:
> > >> Sorry if this has been asked before. Is it possible to determine the
> name
> > >> of a function inside that function? For example,
> > >>
> > >> function blah(x)
> > >>
> > >> my_name = ... # should evaluate to "blah" or :blah
> > >>
> > >> end
> > >>
> > >> I didn't see that in the introspection section of the documentation.
> > >>
> > >> Thanks!
>
>
