@dnolen I asked this question before but do you have an example of how/why :static-fns is not suited for a REPL environment? I'm trying to break it but can't

I thought it might have to do with arity, but I’d also be interested in how changing arity breaks it.

yes compile something with arity 3

compile another function using it

re-compile the first thing with arity 2

call the function that used it

I do not quite understand that example

https://gist.github.com/thheller/3491a77031a798490e70

with static-fns

now contains the output for both

both execute equally

ie. the c parameter is lost

right but those fns don’t exhibit the fancier optimization

IFn?

or which optimization do you mean? since it is the REPL there isn't really anything to optimize?

do your thing again

fn1) arities 3,4 then redef fn1) arities 4,5

in the other fn invoke arity 3

Uncaught TypeError: cljs.user.x.cljs$core$IFn$_invoke$arity$3 is not a function

which is what I'd expect?

without static

Uncaught Error: Invalid arity: 3

granted the error message is better

gist has the code

it’s just wrong, think about dynamic binding a variadic fn instead

static linking is just never the right behavior at the REPL

well should the compiler not prevent static linking for something marked ^:dynamic in all cases?

sure!

simple fix too, all the optimizations are in the :invoke case of the compiler

uhm so if we'd have that :static-fns would be obsolete?

I'm just trying to understand :static-fns since I have it enabled always and always dismissed it as a REPL thing

but after implementing a REPL myself

I still don't understand static-fns

I'll try something with binding and variadic

no

we’re never going to turn on :static-fns by default

don't expect you to, just trying to understand it

the reason we added it was just that it creates strange behavior for people used to the dynamic aspects of Clojure

it was Chouser that pointed out the optimizations broke some REPL expectations

so we put the optimizations behind a flag

can I find that discussion somewhere?

you’d have to look at the #C03S1KBA2 IRC logs

probably from late 2011 or early 2012?

https://gist.github.com/thheller/9fc84ad8d8564c8dc367

static or not both fail in the exact same way

although I'd expect that to work

strange that it doesn't

Uncaught TypeError: (intermediate value)(intermediate value)(...) is not a function is also the weirdest error I have seen

I'll try to dig up the discussion

hmm ok it works in the cljs repl

great, something I can use to understand this

ok nvm works in my repl too .. just need to include cljs.core before trying to eval it

back to square one

I'll keep digging

binding/variadic works with and without static-fns

@thheller: “switching a top level definition from a fn to an object (which implements IFn) can cause problems” (from https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!topic/clojure/c3ho-Y8o6Wg)