I am writing content to an edn file and would like the maximum width of the lines to be greater than the current default value:
(use 'clojure.pprint)
nil
user=> *print-right-margin*
72
This seems to accord with the output I am currently getting. But how to increase the default value?
This is the function I'm using to write out the edn file:
(defn pp-str [x] (-> x clojure.pprint/pprint with-out-str))
Example use:
(spit "foo.edn" (u/pp-str foo))
Where foo might be some hiccup, or other Clojure data.
try rebinding *print-right-margin* either outside the pp-str function:
(binding [*print-right-margin* 1000]
(spit "foo.edn" (u/pp-str foo)))
or from inside:
(defn pp-str [x]
(binding [*print-right-margin* 1000]
(-> x clojure.pprint/pprint with-out-str))))
this would temporarily redefine the value for the scope of the enclosed block. This should help
Notice in the docs for *print-right-margin that it's a 'dynamic var'. This means that you can temporarily change it using binding, for the current thread.
(binding [*print-right-margin* 42]
(pprint my-great-data))
Dynamic vars typically follow the *var* naming convention. Other examples are *out* and *err*.
Related
I am trying to print the documentation for all functions in a given namespace by invoking the following expression in a REPL:
(doseq
[f (dir-fn 'clojure.repl)]
(doc f))
However the invocation of this expression returns nil without printing the documentation to the REPL. I know this might have to do with doc being a macro, but I'm a Clojure novice and am not entirely sure how to understand the problem.
Why does this expression return nil without printing the documentation?
How can this expression be modified so that it prints the documentation for each function in a given namespace?
Thanks!
Update: Combined both provided answers:
(defn ns-docs [ns']
(doseq [[symbol var] (ns-interns ns')]
(newline)
(println symbol)
(print " ")
(println (:doc (meta var)))))
(ns-docs 'clojure.repl)
I would, instead, start here:
The Clojure CheatSheet
ClojureDocs.org
Clojure-Doc.org (similar name, but different)
The API & Reference sections at Clojure.org
Note that doc is in the namespace clojure.repl, which reflects its intended usage (by a human in a repl). Here is some code that will also iterate on a namespace & print doc strings (using a different technique):
(doseq [[fn-symbol fn-var] (ns-interns 'demo.core)]
(newline)
(println fn-symbol)
(println (:doc (meta fn-var))))
where demo.core is the namespace of interest.
Note that ns-interns gives you both a symbol and var like:
fn-symbol => <#clojure.lang.Symbol -main>
fn-var => <#clojure.lang.Var #'demo.core/-main>
The meta function has lots of other info you may want to use someday:
(meta fn-var) =>
<#clojure.lang.PersistentArrayMap
{ :arglists ([& args]),
:doc "The Main Man!",
:line 9, :column 1,
:file "demo/core.clj",
:name -main,
:ns #object[clojure.lang.Namespace 0x14c35a06 "demo.core"]}>
While this probably won't help you with answering your question, the problem of evaluating macro's comes up a lot when you are learning Clojure.
Macros are responsible for the evaluation of their arguments. In this case clojure.repl/doc will ignore the current lexical context and assume that the symbol f that you're giving it is the name of a function you want to see the documentation for. It does this because it's intended to be used at the REPL, and is assuming you wouldn't want to type quotes all the time.
As f doesn't exist, it prints nothing. Then doseq returns nil, since it exists to do something for side effects only - hence starting in do. In order to pass an argument to a macro that refuses to respect the lexical context like this, you need to write the code for each element in the list.
You can do this by hand, or by constructing the code as data, and passing it to eval to execute. You can do this in an imperative style, using doseq:
(doseq [f (ns-interns 'clojure.repl)]
(eval `(doc ~(symbol "clojure.repl" (str (first f))))))
or in a slightly more Clojurey way (which will allow you to see the code that it would execute by removing eval from the end and running it at the REPL):
(->> (ns-interns 'clojure.repl)
(map #(list 'clojure.repl/doc (symbol "clojure.repl" (str (first %)))))
(cons `do)
eval)
In both of these we use quote and syntax-quote to construct some code from the list of symbols reflected from the namespace, and pass it to eval to actually execute it. This page on Clojure's weird characters should point you in the right direction for understanding what's going on here.
This an example of why you shouldn't write macro's, unless you've got no other options. Macro's do not compose, and are often difficult to work with. For a more in depth discussion, Fogus's talk and Christophe Grand's talk are both good talks.
Why does this expression return nil without printing the documentation?
Because the doc macro is receiving the symbol f from your loop, instead of a function symbol directly.
How can this expression be modified so that it prints the documentation for each function in a given namespace?
(defn ns-docs [ns']
(let [metas (->> (ns-interns ns') (vals) (map meta) (sort-by :name))]
(for [m metas :when (:doc m)] ;; you could filter here if you want fns only
(select-keys m [:name :doc]))))
(ns-docs 'clojure.repl)
=>
({:name apropos,
:doc "Given a regular expression or stringable thing, return a seq of all
public definitions in all currently-loaded namespaces that match the
str-or-pattern."}
...
)
Then you can print those maps/strings if you want.
Consider the following reagent component. It uses a ref function, which updates a local state atom, based on the real size of a span element. This is done in order to re-render the component displaying its own size
(defn show-my-size-comp []
(let [size (r/atom nil)]
(fn []
(.log js/console "log!")
[:div
[:span {:ref (fn [el]
(when el (reset! size (get-real-size el))))}
"Hello, my size is:" ]
[:span (prn-str #size)]])))
If the implementation of get-real-size returns a vector, the log message is printed constantly, meaning the component unnecessarily being re-rendered all the time. If it returns just a number or a string, the log appears only twice - as intended in this scenario.
What's the reason for this? Is it maybe that updating an clojure script atom with a new vector (containing the same values though) internally means putting another JavaScript object there, thus changing the atom? Whereas putting a value produces no observable change? Just speculation...*
Anyways - for the real use case, saving the size of the span in a vector would certainly better.. Are there ways to achieve this?
I cam across this, when trying to enhance the answer given in this question.
* since in JS: ({} === {}) // false
I think I have an answer for why vector behaves differently from string/number. Reagent counts a reagent atom as "changed" (and thus updates a component that depends on it) when identical? returns false between the old and the new values. See the subhead "changed?" in this tutorial:
For ratoms, identical? is used (on the value inside the ratom) to determine if a new value has changed with regard to an old value.
However, it turns out that identical? behaves differently for vectors and for strings/ints. If you fire up either a clj or a cljs repl, you'll see that:
(identical? 1 1)
;; true
(identical? "a" "a")
;; true
(identical? [1] [1])
;; false
(identical? ["a"] ["a"])
;; false
If you look at what identical? does here, you'll see that it tests if its arguments are the same object. I think the underlying internal data representation is such that, in clojure, "a" is always the same object as itself, whereas two vectors containing the same value are not the same object as one another.
Confirmation: with ordinary rather than reagent atoms, we can see that string identity is preserved across atom resets, while vector identity is not.
(def a1 (atom "a"))
(let [aa #a1] (reset! a1 "a") (identical? aa #a1))
;; true
(def a2 (atom ["a"]))
(let [aa #a2] (reset! a2 ["a"]) (identical? aa #a2))
;; false
You can work around the problem with a not= check:
(fn [el]
(when el
(let [s (get-real-size el)]
(when (not= s #size)
(reset! size s)))))
I'm not sure what the reason is for why vectors should differ from other values.
Its rerendering like it is supposed to based on how its written. You are derefing the atom in the same function as you are resetting it. I always keep these separate.
(defn span-size [size]
[:span (prn-str #size)])
(defn show-my-size-comp []
(let [size (r/atom nil)]
(fn []
(.log js/console "log!")
[:div
[:span {:ref (fn [el]
(when el (reset! size (get-real-size el))))}
"Hello, my size is:"]
[span-size]])))
Here is an example from joy of clojure:
(let [x 9, y '(- x)]
(println `y)
(println ``y)
(println ``~y)
(println ``~~y))
Output from repl:
typedclj.macros/y
(quote typedclj.macros/y)
typedclj.macros/y
(- x)
If I rearrange the order of quote/unquote a bit, results are still the same (I am wondering why):
(let [x 9, y '(- x)]
(println `y)
(println ``y)
(println `~`y)
(println `~`~y))
But if I put the tilde in front:
(let [x 9, y '(- x)]
(println `y)
(println ``y)
(println `~`y)
(println ~``~y))
I get a strange error:
CompilerException java.lang.IllegalStateException: Attempting to call unbound fn: #'clojure.core/unquote, compiling:(/Users/kaiyin/personal_config_bin_files/workspace/typedclj/src/typedclj/macros.clj:1:25)
Why do I get this error?
Short answer: you're trying to unquote outside of a syntax-quote, and that doesn't make sense.
More details:
This error is generated from the final println. Observe that
(println ~``~y)
expands to
(println (unquote (syntax-quote (syntax-quote (unquote y))))
This happens by the virtue of ~ and the backtick character being reader macros. The expansion unquote is not actually a normal function or a macro. It's a special form which is defined only inside of a syntax-quote. You can see this in the compiler source, in LispReader.java. When you use it outside of a syntax-quote form, the reader macro has still happened but there's no such function as 'unquote'. There is only a bare (def unquote) in core.clj (the very first definition).
When you do a def like that, you end up with a var whose initial binding is an instance of the class cloure.lang.Unbound (it's one of the constructors on clojure.lang.Var. This subclasses clojure.lang.AFn but doesn't specify any arities; so every invocation of it as a function calls throwarity, giving you this exception.
First, I have no experience with CS and Clojure is my first language, so pardon if the following problem has a solution, that is immediately apparent for a programmer.
The summary of the question is as follows: one needs to create atoms at will with unknown yet symbols at unknown times. My approach revolves around a) storing temporarily the names of the atoms as strings in an atom itself; b) changing those strings to symbols with a function; c) using a function to add and create new atoms. The problem pertains to step "c": calling the function does not create new atoms, but using its body does create them.
All steps taken in the REPL are below (comments follow code blocks):
user=> (def atom-pool
#_=> (atom ["a1" "a2"]))
#'user/atom-pool
'atom-pool is the atom that stores intermediate to-be atoms as strings.
user=> (defn atom-symbols []
#_=> (mapv symbol (deref atom-pool)))
#'user/atom-symbols
user=> (defmacro populate-atoms []
#_=> (let [qs (vec (remove #(resolve %) (atom-symbols)))]
#_=> `(do ~#(for [s qs]
#_=> `(def ~s (atom #{}))))))
#'user/populate-atoms
'populate-atoms is the macro, that defines those atoms. Note, the purpose of (remove #(resolve %) (atom-symbols)) is to create only yet non-existing atoms. 'atom-symbols reads 'atom-pool and turns its content to symbols.
user=> (for [s ['a1 'a2 'a-new]]
#_=> (resolve s))
(nil nil nil)
Here it is confirmed that there are no 'a1', 'a2', 'a-new' atoms as of yet.
user=> (defn new-atom [a]
#_=> (do
#_=> (swap! atom-pool conj a)
#_=> (populate-atoms)))
#'user/new-atom
'new-atom is the function, that first adds new to-be atom as string to `atom-pool. Then 'populate-atoms creates all the atoms from 'atom-symbols function.
user=> (for [s ['a1 'a2 'a-new]]
#_=> (resolve s))
(#'user/a1 #'user/a2 nil)
Here we see that 'a1 'a2 were created as clojure.lang.Var$Unbound just by defining a function, why?
user=> (new-atom "a-new")
#'user/a2
user=> (for [s ['a1 'a2 'a-new]]
#_=> (resolve s))
(#'user/a1 #'user/a2 nil)
Calling (new-atom "a-new") did not create the 'a-new atom!
user=> (do
#_=> (swap! atom-pool conj "a-new")
#_=> (populate-atoms))
#'user/a-new
user=> (for [s ['a1 'a2 'a-new]]
#_=> (resolve s))
(#'user/a1 #'user/a2 #'user/a-new)
user=>
Here we see that resorting explicitly to 'new-atom's body did create the 'a-new atom. 'a-new is a type of clojure.lang.Atom, but 'a1 and 'a2 were skipped due to already being present in the namespace as clojure.lang.Var$Unbound.
Appreciate any help how to make it work!
EDIT: Note, this is an example. In my project the 'atom-pool is actually a collection of maps (atom with maps). Those maps have keys {:name val}. If a new map is added, then I create a corresponding atom for this map by parsing its :name key.
"The summary of the question is as follows: one needs to create atoms at will with unknown yet symbols at unknown times. "
This sounds like a solution looking for a problem. I would generally suggest you try another way of achieving whatever the actual functionality is without generating vars at runtime, but if you must, you should use intern and leave out the macro stuff.
You cannot solve this with macros since macros are expanded at compile time, meaning that in
(defn new-atom [a]
(do
(swap! atom-pool conj a)
(populate-atoms)))
populate-atoms is expanded only once; when the (defn new-atom ...) form is compiled, but you're attempting to change its expansion when new-atom is called (which necessarily happens later).
#JoostDiepenmaat is right about why populate-atoms is not behaving as expected. You simply cannot do this using macros, and it is generally best to avoid generating vars at runtime. A better solution would be to define your atom-pool as a map of keywords to atoms:
(def atom-pool
(atom {:a1 (atom #{}) :a2 (atom #{})}))
Then you don't need atom-symbols or populate-atoms because you're not dealing with vars at compile-time, but typical data structures at run-time. Your new-atom function could look like this:
(defn new-atom [kw]
(swap! atom-pool assoc kw (atom #{})))
EDIT: If you don't want your new-atom function to override existing atoms which might contain actual data instead of just #{}, you can check first to see if the atom exists in the atom-pool:
(defn new-atom [kw]
(when-not (kw #atom-pool)
(swap! atom-pool assoc kw (atom #{}))))
I've already submitted one answer to this question, and I think that that answer is better, but here is a radically different approach based on eval:
(def atom-pool (atom ["a1" "a2"]))
(defn new-atom! [name]
(load-string (format "(def %s (atom #{}))" name)))
(defn populate-atoms! []
(doseq [x atom-pool]
(new-atom x)))
format builds up a string where %s is substituted with the name you're passing in. load-string reads the resulting string (def "name" (atom #{})) in as a data structure and evals it (this is equivalent to (eval (read-string "(def ...)
Of course, then we're stuck with the problem of only defining atoms that don't already exist. We could change the our new-atom! function to make it so that we only create an atom if it doesn't already exist:
(defn new-atom! [name]
(when-not (resolve (symbol name))
(load-string (format "(def %s (atom #{}))" name name))))
The Clojure community seems to be against using eval in most cases, as it is usually not needed (macros or functions will do what you want in 99% of cases*), and eval can be potentially unsafe, especially if user input is involved -- see Brian Carper's answer to this question.
*After attempting to solve this particular problem using macros, I came to the conclusion that it either cannot be done without relying on eval, or my macro-writing skills just aren't good enough to get the job done with a macro!
At any rate, I still think my other answer is a better solution here -- generally when you're getting way down into the nuts & bolts of writing macros or using eval, there is probably a simpler approach that doesn't involve metaprogramming.
Given a list of names for variables, I want to set those variables to an expression.
I tried this:
(doall (for [x ["a" "b" "c"]] (def (symbol x) 666)))
...but this yields the error
java.lang.Exception: First argument to def must be a Symbol
Can anyone show me the right way to accomplish this, please?
Clojure's "intern" function is for this purpose:
(doseq [x ["a" "b" "c"]]
(intern *ns* (symbol x) 666))
(doall (for [x ["a" "b" "c"]] (eval `(def ~(symbol x) 666))))
In response to your comment:
There are no macros involved here. eval is a function that takes a list and returns the result of executing that list as code. ` and ~ are shortcuts to create a partially-quoted list.
` means the contents of the following lists shall be quoted unless preceded by a ~
~ the following list is a function call that shall be executed, not quoted.
So ``(def ~(symbol x) 666)is the list containing the symboldef, followed by the result of executingsymbol xfollowed by the number of the beast. I could as well have written(eval (list 'def (symbol x) 666))` to achieve the same effect.
Updated to take Stuart Sierra's comment (mentioning clojure.core/intern) into account.
Using eval here is fine, but it may be interesting to know that it is not necessary, regardless of whether the Vars are known to exist already. In fact, if they are known to exist, then I think the alter-var-root solution below is cleaner; if they might not exist, then I wouldn't insist on my alternative proposition being much cleaner, but it seems to make for the shortest code (if we disregard the overhead of three lines for a function definition), so I'll just post it for your consideration.
If the Var is known to exist:
(alter-var-root (resolve (symbol "foo")) (constantly new-value))
So you could do
(dorun
(map #(-> %1 symbol resolve (alter-var-root %2))
["x" "y" "z"]
[value-for-x value-for-y value-for z]))
(If the same value was to be used for all Vars, you could use (repeat value) for the final argument to map or just put it in the anonymous function.)
If the Vars might need to be created, then you can actually write a function to do this (once again, I wouldn't necessarily claim this to be cleaner than eval, but anyway -- just for the interest of it):
(defn create-var
;; I used clojure.lang.Var/intern in the original answer,
;; but as Stuart Sierra has pointed out in a comment,
;; a Clojure built-in is available to accomplish the same
;; thing
([sym] (intern *ns* sym))
([sym val] (intern *ns* sym val)))
Note that if a Var turns out to have already been interned with the given name in the given namespace, then this changes nothing in the single argument case or just resets the Var to the given new value in the two argument case. With this, you can solve the original problem like so:
(dorun (map #(create-var (symbol %) 666) ["x" "y" "z"]))
Some additional examples:
user> (create-var 'bar (fn [_] :bar))
#'user/bar
user> (bar :foo)
:bar
user> (create-var 'baz)
#'user/baz
user> baz
; Evaluation aborted. ; java.lang.IllegalStateException:
; Var user/baz is unbound.
; It does exist, though!
;; if you really wanted to do things like this, you'd
;; actually use the clojure.contrib.with-ns/with-ns macro
user> (binding [*ns* (the-ns 'quux)]
(create-var 'foobar 5))
#'quux/foobar
user> quux/foobar
5
Evaluation rules for normal function calls are to evaluate all the items of the list, and call the first item in the list as a function with the rest of the items in the list as parameters.
But you can't make any assumptions about the evaluation rules for special forms or macros. A special form or the code produced by a macro call could evaluate all the arguments, or never evaluate them, or evaluate them multiple times, or evaluate some arguments and not others. def is a special form, and it doesn't evaluate its first argument. If it did, it couldn't work. Evaluating the foo in (def foo 123) would result in a "no such var 'foo'" error most of the time (if foo was already defined, you probably wouldn't be defining it yourself).
I'm not sure what you're using this for, but it doesn't seem very idiomatic. Using def anywhere but at the toplevel of your program usually means you're doing something wrong.
(Note: doall + for = doseq.)