views:

934

answers:

4

I have a passing knowledge of other Lisps (particularly Scheme) from way back when. My knowledge is pretty rusty (and was pretty basic to begin with). Recently I've been reading about Clojure. I see that it has both "symbols" and "keywords". Symbols I'm familiar with, but not keywords.

Do other Lisps have keywords? How are keywords different from symbols other than having different notation (ie: colons)?

+2  A: 

Keywords are symbols that evaluate to themselves, so you don't have to remember to quote them.

Greg Hewgill
Is that it? Typing : rather than ' doesn't seem like a big win, especially since : is an extra keypress on most keyboards.
Laurence Gonsalves
Well, it's more than just the character, really. Keywords stay keywords after evaluation, while symbols are evaluated to whatever they bind to. It's more like a semantic difference, because they're typically used for different purposes.
Greg Hewgill
+18  A: 

Here's the Clojure documentation for Keywords and Symbols.

Keywords are symbolic identifiers that evaluate to themselves. They provide very fast equality tests...

Symbols are identifiers that are normally used to refer to something else. They can be used in program forms to refer to function parameters, let bindings, class names and global vars...

Keywords are generally used as lightweight "constant strings", e.g. for the keys of a hash-map or the dispatch values of a multimethod. Symbols are generally used to name variable and functions and it's less common to manipulate them as objects directly except in macros and such. But there's nothing stopping you from using a symbol everywhere you use a keyword (if you don't mind quoting them all the time).

The easiest way to see the difference is to read Keyword.java and Symbol.java in the Clojure source. There are a few obvious implementation differences. For example a Symbol in Clojure can have metadata and a Keyword can't.

In addition to single-colon syntax, you can use a double-colon to make a namespace-qualified keyword.

user> :foo
:foo
user> ::foo
:user/foo

Common Lisp has keywords, as do Ruby and other languages. They are slightly different in those languages of course. Some differences between Common Lisp keywords and Clojure keywords:

  1. Keywords in Clojure are not Symbols.

    user> (symbol? :foo)  
    false
    
  2. Keywords don't belong to any namespace unless you specifically qualify them:

    user> (namespace :foo)
    nil
    user> (namespace ::foo)
    "user"
    

(Thanks Rainer Joswig for giving me ideas of things to look at.)

Brian Carper
This explains _what_ the differences are, but not why two different constructs are needed. Couldn't Clojure have created something with the union of the capabilities of both Keyword and Symbol?
mtnygard
Keywords are lightweight and have a convenient syntax, I think that's about all there is to it. The language would work fine without them but they're nice to have and they are very widely used. You can't have a union of their abilities because Keywords are always self-evaluating (i.e. you can't use them as variable or function names) and Symbols in general can't be always self-evaluating.
Brian Carper
+13  A: 

Common Lisp has keyword symbols.

Keywords are symbols, too.

(symbolp ':foo) -> T

What makes keywords special:

  • :foo is parsed by the Common Lisp reader as the symbol keyword::foo
  • keywords evaluate to themselves: :foo -> :foo
  • the home package of keyword symbols is the KEYWORD package: keyword:foo -> :foo
  • keywords are exported from the package KEYWORD
  • keywords are constants, it is not allowed to assign a different value

Otherwise keywords are ordinary symbols. So keywords can name functions or have property lists.

Remember: in Common Lisp symbols belong to a package. This can be written as:

  • foo, when the symbol is accessible in the current package
  • foo:bar, when the symbol FOO is exported from the package BAR
  • foo::bar, when the symbol FOO is in the package BAR

For keyword symbols that means that :foo, keyword:foo and keyword::foo are all the same symbol. Thus the latter two notations are usually not used.

So :foo is just parsed to be in the package KEYWORD, assuming that giving no package name before the symbol name means by default the KEYWORD package.

Rainer Joswig
+2  A: 

:keywords are also treated specially by many of the collections, allowing for some really convenient syntax.

(:user-id (get-users-map)

is the same as

((get-users-map) :user-id)

this makes things just a little more flexable

Arthur Ulfeldt
This is also true for symbols, ('a {'a 1 'b 2}) => 1 and ({'a 1 'b 2} 'b) => 2.
Jonas