The cost/benefit is hard to work out. Look ahead 7 years - we would have the ceremonial (jvm... (MyType:baz...)) in some places and the good old elegant (.baz ...) in others, and the tooling will work just as well with it. On the other hand, if you routinely do tons of interop with a wide variety of classes whose method names are subtly distinct and mostly 40 letters or more, then (jvm...) will seem like genius! Nonetheless, I hope your work will inspire code completers to go the extra mile, once and for all. In the meantime, you could wrap that dreadful interop with a library whose method names are shorter.
-- 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.
