Is it possible to split a Clojure namespace over multiple source files when doing ahead-of-time compilation with :gen-class? How do (:main true) and (defn- ...) come into play?
Overview
Certainly you can, in fact clojure.core namespace itself is split up this way and provides a good model which you can follow by looking in src/clj/clojure:
core.clj
core_deftype.clj
core_print.clj
core_proxy.clj
..etc..
All these files participate to build up the single clojure.core namespace.
Primary File
One of these is the primary file, named to match the namespace name so that it will be found when someone mentions it in a :use or :require. In this case the main file is clojure/core.clj, and it starts with an ns form. This is where you should put all your namespace configuration, regardless of which of your other files may need them. This normally includes :gen-class as well, so something like:
(ns my.lib.of.excellence
(:use [clojure.java.io :as io :only [reader]])
(:gen-class :main true))
Then at appropriate places in your primary file (most commonly all at the end) use load to bring in your helper files. In clojure.core it looks like this:
(load "core_proxy")
(load "core_print")
(load "genclass")
(load "core_deftype")
(load "core/protocols")
(load "gvec")
Note that you don't need the current directory as a prefix, nor do you need the .clj suffix.
Helper files
Each of the helper files should start by declaring which namespace they're helping, but should do so using the in-ns function. So for the example namespace above, the helper files would all start with:
(in-ns 'my.lib.of.excellence)
That's all it takes.
gen-class
Because all these files are building a single namespace, each function you define can be in any of the primary or helper files. This of course means you can define your gen-class functions in any file you'd like:
(defn -main [& args]
...)
Note that Clojure's normal order-of-definition rules still apply for all functions, so you need to make sure that whatever file defines a function is loaded before you try to use that function.
Private Vars
You also asked about the (defn- foo ...) form which defines a namespace-private function. Functions defined like this as well as other :private vars are visible from within the namespace where they're defined, so the primary and all helper files will have access to private vars defined in any of the files loaded so far.
Related
I'm attempting to use a string saved in a variable to call a function like so:
(defn update-product-list [] "Test")
(defn handle-state-change [action]
((resolve (symbol action))))
(handle-state-change "update-product-list")
However, this gives me the following error: Assert failed: Argument to resolve must be a quoted symbol
I've also tried changing the above line to:
((resolve (quote (symbol action))))
But this still gives an error. I also tried changing it just to:
((resolve 'action))
But this gives a different error I don't quite understand: js/action is shadowed by a local. I don't want to override the function just call it. Not sure where I'm going wrong. I've looked at a few examples, but can't see to pin it down.
ClojureScript supports :advanced optimization, in which Google Closure Compiler will rename, inline, or eliminate (unused) functions in order to implement minification. In short, the name of the function you want to look up will, in general, simply no longer exist under :advanced.
Because of this, ClojureScript's resolve is a compile-time facility (a macro requiring a literal quoted symbol).
If you are using :simple or self-hosted ClojureScript, more options are available to you because the support needed persists into runtime. For example Planck has a planck.core/resolve that behave's like Clojure's resolve. A similar approach is possible in Lumo, and similar facilities can be fashioned if using :simple.
In general though, given :advanced, if you need to map strings to a set of functions, you need to somehow arrange to have a static mapping constructed at compile time to support this (the set of functions must be known a priori, at compile time).
If you have a namespace (the name of which is statically known at compile time) which defines functions that need to be dynamically called via strings, you could consider making use of ns-publics:
cljs.user=> (ns foo.core)
foo.core=> (defn square [x] (* x x))
#'foo.core/square
foo.core=> (in-ns 'cljs.user)
nil
cljs.user=> (when-some [fn-var ((ns-publics 'foo.core) (symbol "square"))]
(fn-var 3))
9
This will work under :advanced. The mapping constructed by ns-publics is static; built at compile-time. If you have multiple namespaces that need such treatment, you could merge several calls to ns-publics to build a larger map.
The advantage of this approach is that the code involved is pretty short and requires little maintenance. The disadvantage is that it dumps all of the public vars of the namespace (foo.core in this example) into your generated code (and the generated code for vars is somewhat verbose). Another disadvantage is that you need to statically know the namespace(s) involved at compile time.
If you need to further minimize generated code size, you could just build / maintain a simple static map from string to function value as in
(def fns {"square" foo.core/square})
and use it appropriately, keeping it up to date as your codebase evolves.
Another option would be to mark the functions that you need to access using ^:export meta, and then to call those functions using JavaScript interop. For example if you define the function this way
(defn ^:export square [x] (* x x))
then you can use strings / interop to lookup the function and call it at runtime. Here's an example:
((goog.object/getValueByKeys js/window #js ["foo" "core" "square"]) 3)
The use of ^:export and :advanced is covered here. If you know that you are using :simple or less, then you can simply use JavaScript interop to call the functions of interest, without needn't to use ^:export.
Note that there is no general solution that would let you look up a function by name at runtime under :advanced without somehow putting some aspect of that function into your code at compile time. (In fact, if a function is not referenced in a way that Google Closure Compiler can statically, see, the function implementation will be completely eliminated as dead code.) In the above, ns-publics grabs all the vars for a namespace at compile time, rolling your own lookup map sets up static code to refer to the function value, and using ^:export statically arranges to make the name of the function persist into runtime.
You need to use it like this:
((resolve 'inc) 5)) => 6
or, deconstructed a bit:
(let [the-fn (resolve 'inc)]
(the-fn 7))
=> 8
If you have the function name as a string, use the symbol function to convert from string => symbol (from clojuredocs.org):
user=> ((-> "first" symbol resolve) [1 2 3])
1
And, never forget the Clojure CheatSheet!
In perl, sometimes it is necessary to specify the function name in the use statement.
For example:
use Data::DPath ('dpath');
will work but
use Data::DPath;
won't.
Other modules don't need the function names specified, for example:
use WWW::Mechanize;
Why?
Each module chooses what functions it exports by default. Some choose to export no functions by default at all, you have to ask for them. There's a few good reasons to do this, and one bad one.
If you're a class like WWW::Mechanize, then you don't need to export any functions. Everything is a class or object method. my $mech = WWW::Mechanize->new.
If you're a pragma like strict then there are no functions nor methods, it does its work simply by being loaded.
Some modules export waaay too many functions by default. An example is Test::Deep which exports...
all any array array_each arrayelementsonly arraylength arraylengthonly bag blessed bool cmp_bag cmp_deeply cmp_methods cmp_set code eq_deeply hash
hash_each hashkeys hashkeysonly ignore Isa isa listmethods methods noclass
none noneof num obj_isa re reftype regexpmatches regexponly regexpref
regexprefonly scalarrefonly scalref set shallow str subbagof subhashof
subsetof superbagof superhashof supersetof useclass
The problem comes when another module tries to export the same functions, or if you write a function with the same name. Then they clash and you get mysterious warnings.
$ cat ~/tmp/test.plx
use Test::Deep;
use List::Util qw(all);
$ perl -w ~/tmp/test.plx
Subroutine main::all redefined at /Users/schwern/perl5/perlbrew/perls/perl-5.20.2/lib/5.20.2/Exporter.pm line 66.
at /Users/schwern/tmp/test.plx line 2.
Prototype mismatch: sub main::all: none vs (&#) at /Users/schwern/perl5/perlbrew/perls/perl-5.20.2/lib/5.20.2/Exporter.pm line 66.
at /Users/schwern/tmp/test.plx line 2.
For this reason, exporting lots of functions is discouraged. For example, the Exporter documentation advises...
Do not export method names!
Do not export anything else by default without a good reason!
Exports pollute the namespace of the module user. If you must export try to use #EXPORT_OK in preference to #EXPORT and avoid short or common symbol names to reduce the risk of name clashes.
Unfortunately, some modules take this too far. Data::DPath is a good example. It has a really clear main function, dpath(), which it should export by default. Otherwise it's basically useless.
You can always turn off exporting with use Some::Module ();.
The reason is that some modules simply contain functions in them and they may or may not have chosen to export them by default, and that means they may need to be explicitly imported by the script to access directly or use a fully qualified name to access them. For example:
# in some script
use SomeModule;
# ...
SomeModule::some_function(...);
or
use SomeModule ('some_function');
# ...
some_function(...);
This can be the case if the module was not intended to be used in an object-oriented way, i.e. where no classes have been defined and lines such as my $obj = SomeModule->new() wouldn't work.
If the module has defined content in the EXPORT_OK array, it means that the client code will only get access to it if it "asks for it", rather than "automatically" when it's actually present in the EXPORT array.
Some modules automatically export their content by means of the #EXPORT array. This question and the Exporter docs have more detail on this.
Without you actually posting an MCVE, it's difficult to know what you've done in your Funcs.pm module that may be allowing you to import everything without using EXPORT and EXPORT_OK arrays. Perhaps you did not include the package Funcs; line in your module, as #JonathanLeffler suggested in the comments. Perhaps you did something else. Perl is one of those languages where people pride themselves in the TMTOWTDI mantra, often to a detrimental/counter-productive level, IMHO.
The 2nd example you presented is very different and fairly straightforward. When you have something like:
use WWW::Mechanize;
my $mech = new WWW::Mechanize;
$mech->get("http://www.google.com");
you're simply instantiating an object of type WWW::Mechanize and calling an instance method, called get, on it. There's no need to import an object's methods because the methods are part of the object itself. Modules looking to have an OOP approach are not meant to export anything. They're different situations.
I can't find answer what is the difference in namespace definition using double :: ( when I read source files where both are used ) between:
namespace eval somenamespace {
}
and
namespace eval ::somenamespace {
}
sample without ::
https://github.com/tcltk/tcllib/blob/master/modules/generator/generator.tcl#L16
sample with ::
https://github.com/tcltk/tcllib/blob/master/modules/ftp/ftp.tcl#L56
It's a bit like path names. If you are in the root directory (the unnamed / path) it makes no difference if you use bar or /bar: both refer to the /bar directory. If you are in /foo, it matters very much if you use bar or /bar: the first refers to the /foo/bar directory, and the second still refers to the /bar directory.
:: is like / for namespace names. In the root namespace (the empty :: name) it makes no difference if you use bar or ::bar: both refer to the ::bar namespace. If you are in ::foo, it matters very much if you use bar or ::bar: the first refers to the ::foo::bar namespace, and the second still refers to the ::bar namespace.
Documentation: namespace
In general, it depends on the context in which the code is run. If it is run in the global namespace, there is no difference between the two. If it is run inside another namespace (e.g., in ::foo for the sake of argument) there's a difference (since one creates ::foo::somenamespace).
For packages it makes little difference, the scripts provided by package ifneeded — and hence run by package require — are actually run by this line (inside tclPkg.c, in the function PkgRequireCore):
code = Tcl_EvalEx(interp, script, -1, TCL_EVAL_GLOBAL);
That is, they're always in the global context, the :: namespace.
Is there any way to define an Erlang function from within the Erlang shell instead of from an erl file (aka a module)?
Yes but it is painful. Below is a "lambda function declaration" (aka fun in Erlang terms).
1> F=fun(X) -> X+2 end.
%%⇒ #Fun <erl_eval.6.13229925>
Have a look at this post. You can even enter a module's worth of declaration if you ever needed. In other words, yes you can declare functions.
One answer is that the shell only evaluates expressions and function definitions are not expressions, they are forms. In an erl file you define forms not expressions.
All functions exist within modules, and apart from function definitions a module consists of attributes, the more important being the modules name and which functions are exported from it. Only exported functions can be called from other modules. This means that a module must be defined before you can define the functions.
Modules are the unit of compilation in erlang. They are also the basic unit for code handling, i.e. it is whole modules which are loaded into, updated, or deleted from the system. In this respect defining functions separately one-by-one does not fit into the scheme of things.
Also, from a purely practical point of view, compiling a module is so fast that there is very little gain in being able to define functions in the shell.
This depends on what you actually need to do.
There are functions that one could consider as 'throwaways', that is, are defined once to perform a test with, and then you move on. In such cases, the fun syntax is used. Although a little cumbersome, this can be used to express things quickly and effectively. For instance:
1> Sum = fun(X, Y) -> X + Y end.
#Fun<erl_eval.12.128620087>
2> Sum(1, 2).
3
defines an anonymous fun that is bound to the variable (or label) Sum. Meanwhile, the following defines a named fun, called F, that is used to create a new process whose PID (<0.80.0>) is bound to Pid. Note that F is called in a tail recursive fashion in the second clause of receive, enabling the process to loop until the message stop is sent to it.
3> Pid = spawn(fun F() -> receive stop -> io:format("Stopped~n"); Msg -> io:format("Got: ~p~n", [Msg]), F() end end).
<0.80.0>
4> Pid ! hello.
hello
Got: hello
5> Pid ! stop.
Stopped
stop
6>
However you might need to define certain utility functions that you intend to use over and over again in the Erlang shell. In this case, I would suggest using the user_default.erl file together with .erlang to automatically load these custom utility functions into the Erlang shell as soon as this is launched. For instance, you could write a function that compiles all the Erlang files in living in the current directory.
I have written a small guide on how to do this on this GitHub link. You might find it helpful and instructive.
If you want to define a function on the shell to use it as macro (because it encapsulates some functionality that you need frequently), have a look at
https://erldocs.com/current/stdlib/shell_default.html
I need to run multiple instances of a C program in VxWorks (VxWorks has a global namespace). The problem is that the C program defines global variables (which are intended for use by a specific instance of that program) which conflict in the global namespace. I would like to make minimal changes to the program in order to make this work. All ideas welcomed!
Regards
By the way ... This isn't a good time to mention that global variables are not best practice!
The easiest thing to do would be to use task Variables (see taskVarLib documentation).
When using task variables, the variable is specific to the task now in context. On a context switch, the current variable is stored and the variable for the new task is loaded.
The caveat is that a task variable can only be a 32-bit number.
Each global variable must also be added independently (via its own call to taskVarAdd?) and it also adds time to the context switch.
Also, you would NOT be able to share the global variable with other tasks.
You can't use task variables with ISRs.
Another Possibility:
If you are using Vxworks 6.x, you can make a Real Time Process application.
This follows a process model (similar to Unix/Windows) where each instance of your program has it's own global memory space, independent of any other instance.
I had to solve this when integrating two third-party libraries from the same vendor. Both libraries used some of the same symbol names, but they were not compatible with each other. Because these were coming from a vendor, we couldn't afford to search & replace. And task variables were not applicable either since (a) the two libs might be called from the same task and (b) some of the dupe symbols were functions.
Assume we have app1 and app2, linked, respectively, to lib1 and lib2. Both libs define the same symbols so must be hidden from each other.
Fortunately (if you're using GNU tools) objcopy allows you to change the type of a variable after linking.
Here's a sketch of the solution, you'll have to modify it for your needs.
First, perform a partial link for app1 to bind it to lib1. Here, I'm assuming that you've already partially linked *.o in app1 into app1_tmp1.o.
$(LD_PARTIAL) $(LDFLAGS) -Wl,-i -o app1_tmp2.o app1_tmp1.o $(APP1_LIBS)
Then, hide all of the symbols from lib1 in the tmp2 object you just created to generate the "real" object for app1.
objcopymips `nmmips $(APP1_LIBS) | grep ' [DRT] ' | sed -e's/^[0-9A-Fa-f]* [DRT] /-L /'` app1_tmp2.o app1.o
Repeat this for app2. Now you have app1.o and app2.o ready to link into your final application without any conflicts.
The drawback of this solution is that you don't have access to any of these symbols from the host shell. To get around this, you can temporarily turn off the symbol hiding for one or the other of the libraries for debugging.
Another possible solution would be to put your application's global variables in a static structure. For example:
From:
int global1;
int global2;
int someApp()
{
global2 = global1 + 3;
...
}
TO:
typedef struct appGlobStruct {
int global1;
int global2;
} appGlob;
int someApp()
{
appGlob.global2 = appGlob.global1 + 3;
}
This simply turns into a search & replace in your application code. No change to the structure of the code.