I want to display random (doc) page for some namespace.
The random function name I can get by:
user=> (rand-nth (keys (ns-publics 'clojure.core)))
unchecked-char
When I try to pass this to (doc) I get this:
user=> (doc (rand-nth (keys (ns-publics 'clojure.core))))
ClassCastException clojure.lang.PersistentList cannot be cast to clojure.lang.Symbol clojure.core/ns-resolve (core.clj:3883)
I'm new to Clojure and I'm not sure how to deal with this... I tried to convert this into regexp and use (find-doc) but maybe there is a better way to do this...
Explanation
The problem here is that doc is a macro, not a function. You can verify this with the source macro in the repl.
(source doc)
; (defmacro doc
; "Prints documentation for a var or special form given its name"
; {:added "1.0"}
; [name]
; (if-let [special-name ('{& fn catch try finally try} name)]
; (#'print-doc (#'special-doc special-name))
; (cond
; (special-doc-map name) `(#'print-doc (#'special-doc '~name))
; (resolve name) `(#'print-doc (meta (var ~name)))
; (find-ns name) `(#'print-doc (namespace-doc (find-ns '~name))))))
If you're new to Clojure (and lisps), you might not have encountered macros yet. As a devastatingly brief explanation, where functions operate on evaluated code, macros operate on unevaluated code - that is, source code itself.
This means that when you type
(doc (rand-nth (keys (ns-publics 'clojure.core))))
doc attempts to operate on the actual line of code - (rand-nth (keys (ns-publics 'clojure.core))) - rather than the evaluated result (the symbol this returns). Code being nothing more than a list in Clojure, this is why the error is telling you that a list can't be cast to a symbol.
Solution
So, what you really want to do is evaluate the code, then call doc on the result. We can do this by writing another macro which first evaluates the code you give it, then passes that to doc.
(defmacro eval-doc
[form]
(let [resulting-symbol (eval form)]
`(doc ~resulting-symbol)))
You can pass eval-doc arbitrary forms and it will evaluate them before passing them to doc. Now we're good to go.
(eval-doc (rand-nth (keys (ns-publics 'clojure.core))))
Edit:
While the above works well enough in the repl, if you're using ahead ahead-of-time compilation, you'll find that it produces the same result every time. This is because the resulting-symbol in the let statement is produced during the compilation phase. Compiling once ahead of time means that this value is baked into the .jar. What we really want to do is push the evaluation of doc to runtime. So, let's rewrite eval-doc as a function.
(defn eval-doc
[sym]
(eval `(doc ~sym)))
Simple as that.
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.
I have a macro defprinter where I can define functions that: get a value in a dic based on destructuring + print that variable.
This looks like:
(defmacro defprinter [name pattern]
(list 'defn name [pattern] '(prn to-print)))
So I can do something like (defprinter print-lemons {to-print :lemons}) and then (print-lemons {:lemons "lemons"}) and it will print the correct thing (and I can define printers with any kind of destructuring on the first argument).
But now I want to give the option of that function maybe knowing how to print with a color as well, such as, if the symbol color is defined, it should do (prn color "-colored " to-print), but else just (prn color).
So, the function generated by (defprinter print-lemons {to-print :lemons}) should work the same as above, while (defprinter print-lemons {to-print :lemons, color :color}) would write a function that performs the colored version.
Moreover, I want the same effect if I do
(let [color "black"] (defprinter print-lemons {to-print :lemons})) or (def color "black") (defprinter print-lemons {to-print :lemons}).
Is that possible?
I've tried writing it the following way:
(defmacro defprinter [name pattern]
(list 'defn name [pattern]
'(try (eval '(prn (str color "-colored " to-print)))
(catch java.lang.RuntimeException _
(prn to-print)))))
In my understanding the function the macro will write will try to eval the expression at runtime, fail with a RuntimeException if color is not defined and then execute the (prn to-print). And even though it would check for the existence of color at runtime, to-print (which always need to exist for that function) would be checked at compile time when the macro expands.
But what happens here is that I always get a RuntimeException, even when color is defined (even if I leave only to-print on the eval statement, it can't find it but the clause in the catch works fine). Seems like the symbol isn't being resolved as I would expect during eval, but I can't think of any other way to achieve this.
Any suggestions?
First off, it probably makes sense to split apart the two concerns you're working with here: defining a function, and determining how to print based on what vars/locals are available. Making macros as simple as possible tends to make it easier to figure out what's going on.
When deciding what to print, you really have 3 cases:
color is a local
color is a var (or class, I guess?)
color is undefined
&env is a useful and rarely-used tool (only available within macros) that lets you take a look at what's available as a local.
And resolve lets you look at what vars there are with that name.
So in this example, there are 3 potential expressions that could make up the body of the function defined with def-color-printer:
(defn make-print-expression [env]
(if (contains? env 'color)
`(prn (str ~'color "-colored " ~'to-print))
(if-let [color (resolve 'color)]
`(prn (str #~color "-colored " ~'to-print))
`(prn ~'to-print))))
(defmacro def-color-printer [name pattern]
(list `defn name [pattern]
(make-print-expression &env)))
(def-color-printer print-limes {to-print :limes})
(let [color "green"]
(def-color-printer print-limes-color-with-local {to-print :limes}))
(def color "greyish")
(def-color-printer print-limes-color-with-var {to-print :limes})
(print-limes {:limes "limes!"})
;=> "limes!"
(print-limes-color-with-local {:limes "limes!"})
;=> "green-colored limes!"
(print-limes-color-with-var {:limes "limes!"})
;=> "greyish-colored limes!"
I also wrote a blog about Clojure's quoting in case the syntax-quoting syntax is unfamiliar.
the resolve function will likely help you out with this. It returns the thing a symbol represents in the current namespace, or it returns nil. You can feed it to an if expression:
user> (resolve 'asdf)
nil
user> (if (resolve 'asdf) :defined :not-defined)
:not-defined
Remember to quote the symbol you want to resolve in the test.
I want to get following results when I evaluate edit-url and (edit-url 1).
edit-url --> "/articles/:id/edit"
(edit-url 1) --> "/articles/1/edit"
Is it possible to define such a Var or something?
Now, I use following function, but I don't want to write (edit-url) to get const string.
(defn edit-url
([] "/articles/:id/edit")
([id] (str "/articles/" id "/edit")))
Thanks in advance.
If those behaviors are exactly what you want, print-method and tagged literals may be used to imitate them.
(defrecord Path [path]
clojure.lang.IFn
(invoke [this n]
(clojure.string/replace path ":id" (str n))))
(defmethod print-method Path [o ^java.io.Writer w]
(.write w (str "#path\"" (:path o) "\"")))
(set! *data-readers* (assoc *data-readers* 'path ->Path))
(comment
user=> (def p #path"/articles/:id/edit")
#'user/p
user=> p
#path"/articles/:id/edit"
user=> (p 1)
"/articles/1/edit"
user=>
)
edit-url will either have the value of an immutable string or function. Not both.
The problem will fade when you write a function with better abstraction that takes a string and a map of keywords to replace with words. It should work like this
(generate-url "/articles/:id/edit" {:id 1})
Clojure is a "Lisp 1" which means that is has a single namespace for all symbols, including both data scalars and functions. What you have written shows the functionally of both a string and a function but for a single name, which you can do in Common Lisp but not Clojure (not that a "Lisp 2" has its own inconveniences as well).
In general this type of "problem" is a non issue if you organize your vars better. Why not just make edit-url a function with variable arity? Without arguments it returns something, with arguments it returns something else. Really the possibilities are endless, even more so when you consider making a macro instead of a function (not that I'm advocating that).
(use '[clojure.contrib.trace])
(dotrace [str] (reduce str [\a \b]))
In a nutshell:
That's because trace-fn-call, which is the thing dotrace uses to wrap the functions to be traced, uses str to produce the nice TRACE foo => val output.
Extended explanation:
The dotrace macro does its magic by installing a thread binding for each Var holding a function to be traced; in this case, there is one such Var, clojure.core/str. The replacement looks roughly like so:
(let [f ##'str]
(fn [& args]
(trace-fn-call 'str f args)))
The trace-fn-call, to quote its docstring, "Traces a single call to a function f with args.". In doing so, it calls the traced function, takes note of the return value, prints out a nice informative message of the form TRACE foo => val and returns the value obtained from the traced function so that regular execution may continue.
As mentioned above, this TRACE foo => val message is produced used str; however, in the case at hand, this is actually the function being traced, so a call to it leads to another call to trace-fn-call, which makes its own attempt to produce the tracing output string using str, which leads to another call to trace-fn-call... ultimately leading to the stack blowing up.
A workaround:
The following modified versions of dotrace and trace-fn-call should work fine even in the presence of weird bindings for core Vars (note that futures may not be scheduled promptly; if that's a problem, see below):
(defn my-trace-fn-call
"Traces a single call to a function f with args. 'name' is the
symbol name of the function."
[name f args]
(let [id (gensym "t")]
#(future (tracer id (str (trace-indent) (pr-str (cons name args)))))
(let [value (binding [*trace-depth* (inc *trace-depth*)]
(apply f args))]
#(future (tracer id (str (trace-indent) "=> " (pr-str value))))
value)))
(defmacro my-dotrace
"Given a sequence of function identifiers, evaluate the body
expressions in an environment in which the identifiers are bound to
the traced functions. Does not work on inlined functions,
such as clojure.core/+"
[fnames & exprs]
`(binding [~#(interleave fnames
(for [fname fnames]
`(let [f# #(var ~fname)]
(fn [& args#]
(my-trace-fn-call '~fname f# args#)))))]
~#exprs))
(Rebinding trace-fn-call around a regular dotrace apparently doesn't work; my guess is that's because of clojure.* Var calls still being hard-wired by the compiler, but that's a separate matter. The above will work, anyway.)
An alternative would be to use the above my-dotrace macro together with a my-trace-fn-call function not using futures, but modified to call custom replacements for the clojure.contrib.trace functions using the following in place of str:
(defn my-str [& args] (apply (.getRoot #'clojure.core/str) args))
The replacements are straightforward and tedious and I omit them from the answer.
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.)