I like Specter and would love to have it readily available in any project, so that aspect is appealing. However, there are a handful of subtle ways that Specter doesn't feel like it was designed by the same people who wrote core. For example, Clojure's built-in transformation functions on data structures put the data structure first, so that they can be easily applied to data structures sitting inside reference types. For similar reasons of convenience, Clojure's update-in can take extra parameters for the transformation function. Specter puts the navigator first and transform doesn't take optional additional args to pass to the transformation function.
So I think these subtle differences might cause confusion if it were in core. Newcomers already struggle with the fact that sequence transformation functions (map, take, reduce) are an exception to the rule that data structures tend to come first. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
