On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Cedric St-Jean <[email protected]> wrote:
> In my case, I wanted to count how many times some functions were called.
> Kinda like a profiler, but for a different purpose. If the function name was
> available, I could move the macro "call" inside the function body, which
> would make more sense.
Than what about sth like
```julia
macro count_execute()
@gensym counter
quote
global $counter
if isdefined(:($counter))
$counter = $counter::Int + 1
else
$counter = 0
end
end
end
```
>
> On Wednesday, August 5, 2015 at 2:25:42 PM UTC-4, Isaiah wrote:
>>
>> I'm still curious what problem / design this is trying to solve. Be aware
>> that doing something like this for custom runtime dispatching is likely to
>> be slow (except in the macro case which does not really count).
>>
>> Are you both coming from some other programming language that exposes this
>> in a first-class way? Both PHP and JavaScript seem to make this information
>> available, but R does not (except for a callstack hack).
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 2:10 PM, Cedric St-Jean <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> 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]>
>>>> >
>>>> > 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]> 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!
>>>>
>>
>
