Skip to content

Add suport for adding a prefix to module exports #35

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

donaldsonjw
Copy link
Contributor

extend the module system to support prefixing exported symbols with a
user-provided symbol. For example, the following prefixes all of the
exports from the test module with t-.

(import (:prefix t- test))

You can also prefix an explicitly specified set of symbols:

(import (:prefix t- doit fizzbuzz test))

In this case, doit and fizzbuzz are available as t-doit and
t-fizzbuzz.

The pre-exisiting alias functionality is still available and takes
precendence.

(import (:prefix t- (my-doit doit) fizzbuzz test))

In the above, doit is available as my-doit and fizzbuzz as t-fizzbuzz

extend the module system to support prefixing exported symbols with a
user-provided symbol. For example, the following prefixes all of the
exports from the test module with t-.

(import (:prefix t- test))

You can also prefix an explicitly specified set of symbols:

(import (:prefix t- doit fizzbuzz test))

In this case, doit and fizzbuzz are available as t-doit and
t-fizzbuzz.

The pre-exisiting alias functionality is still available and takes
precendence.

(import (:prfix t- (my-doit doit) fizzbuzz test))

In the above, doit is available as my-doit and fizzbuzz as t-fizzbuzz
@manuel-serrano
Copy link
Owner

Hi Joseph,

Sorry for having being so slow to accept your pull request. There is now a minor conflict because I have had to fix the eval module implementation. In order not to slow down the release of 4.3h, I propose to postpone the integration of your pull request. I will release 4.3h and right after that integrate your pull request.
Once again, all my apologizes for the delay and thanks again for your contribution.

@donaldsonjw
Copy link
Contributor Author

I am fine with postponing the integration, and I corrected the merge conflict you noted. Let me know if anything additional is required.

Thanks,
Joseph

This method was causing a java compilation error and is not used
anywhere, so I removed it.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants