Clarify ns vs in-ns in namespace reference#735
Open
kovan wants to merge 1 commit intoclojure:masterfrom
Open
Conversation
The previous wording ("it's best to use in-ns" at the REPL) implied
in-ns is preferable to ns at the REPL, which is misleading since ns
works fine there and is more convenient. Rephrase to present in-ns as
an alternative with different behavior (bare namespace without
clojure.core mappings).
Fixes clojure#663
Member
|
Author is not a contributor and this appears to be AI generated |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Rephrases the REPL namespace guidance from "it's best to use
in-ns" to presentin-nsas an alternative with different behavior. The previous wording impliedin-nsis preferable at the REPL, butnsworks fine there and is more convenient since it automatically refersclojure.core.Fixes #663