On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 7:39 AM, Rich Hickey richhic...@gmail.com wrote:
:use … :only doesn't have the problems of full :use.
Enhancement ticket and patch for :use … :only welcome. Note it must support
:use … :only only, i.e. :only is required.
Rich
:use … :only doesn't have the problems of full :use.
Enhancement ticket and patch for :use … :only welcome. Note it must support
:use … :only only, i.e. :only is required.
Rich
On Aug 9, 2011, at 10:01 AM, David Nolen wrote:
On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 5:30 PM, Rich Hickey richhic...@gmail.com
On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 5:30 PM, Rich Hickey richhic...@gmail.com wrote:
In Clojure, namespaces are different from the host's packages, in
ClojureScript they are the same (insofar as they match the Google Closure
approach).
Makes sense.
Why all the attention to :use - I thought everyone
On Aug 9, 2011, at 10:01 AM, David Nolen wrote:
On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 5:30 PM, Rich Hickey richhic...@gmail.com wrote:
Why all the attention to :use - I thought everyone agreed using it is a bad
idea?
I like pairing :use with :only especially between files that belong to the
same
In Clojure, namespaces are different from the host's packages, in
ClojureScript they are the same (insofar as they match the Google
Closure approach).
Why all the attention to :use - I thought everyone agreed using it is
a bad idea?
In any case, ClojureScript is a subset and right now
On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 2:30 PM, Rich Hickey richhic...@gmail.com wrote:
Why all the attention to :use - I thought everyone agreed using it is a bad
idea?
...
The only benefit
I see is that you can avoid a (minimum 2 character) prefix.
The other benefit is it saves you from the cognitive load
On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Mark Engelberg mark.engelb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 2:30 PM, Rich Hickey richhic...@gmail.com wrote:
Why all the attention to :use - I thought everyone agreed using it is a bad
idea?
...
The only benefit
I see is that you can avoid a
Why all the attention to :use - I thought everyone agreed using it is
a bad idea?
Really? I thought it's use was only considered bad form in the absence of
:only
The only benefit I see is that you can avoid a (minimum 2
character) prefix.
I would think the obvious benefit is its
how do I deal with ClojureScript compile errors? For
instance:
Would it be possible to look at you project source?
--
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
Would it be possible to look at you project source?
Sure this is all the source I currently have written:
;:mode=clojure:
(ns lib.dom-helpers
(:require [goog.dom :as dom]
[goog.dom.classes :as classes]))
(defn find-node [search]
(if (keyword? search)
The following lines looks problematic:
(ns mainpage
(:use lib.dom-helpers))
That is, ClojureScript only supports the (ns foo (:require [a.b :as
c])) form. Try changing your ns declaration accordingly.
The error message could be slightly better I agree. ;-)
:F
--
You received
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 2:51 PM, Fogus mefo...@gmail.com wrote:
The following lines looks problematic:
(ns mainpage
(:use lib.dom-helpers))
That is, ClojureScript only supports the (ns foo (:require [a.b :as
c])) form. Try changing your ns declaration accordingly.
The error
You don't need 'use' in production? ;)
*ducks*
On Friday, August 5, 2011 12:06:29 PM UTC-7, David Nolen wrote:
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 2:51 PM, Fogus mef...@gmail.com wrote:
The following lines looks problematic:
(ns mainpage
(:use lib.dom-helpers))
That is, ClojureScript only
On Aug 5, 2011, at 3:06 PM, David Nolen wrote:
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 2:51 PM, Fogus mefo...@gmail.com wrote:
The following lines looks problematic:
(ns mainpage
(:use lib.dom-helpers))
That is, ClojureScript only supports the (ns foo (:require [a.b :as
c])) form. Try changing your
In Clojure, there is a clear distinction between using Clojure namespaces
and importing interop packages.
Is it a goal then to blur that line in ClojureScript?
'use' couldn't be used analogously just for ClojureScript names as it is in
Clojure?
On Friday, August 5, 2011 5:14:36 PM UTC-7, Rich
15 matches
Mail list logo
