So from an ops point of view, I like your first approach; viz. pass the environment parameter explicitly.
I prefer being explicit about every single invocation of any ops task. The namespace solution, while being "legal", causes the configuration to become implicit, one has to look at the REPL prompt to "know", rather than be confident that we told the function exactly where to call. >From a Clojure sensibilities point of view, what was stateless (explicit param) becomes stateful (implicit global state with def server). This can cause all manner of subtle issues, e.g. accidentally referring to the var instead of the resolved var in some service function. Personally, I would go with your original approach, because it forces me to slow down a little and pay attention, while I'm typing, every single time. This is in service of human error mitigation. I would say the explicit workflow is close to the "pointing and calling" method https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pointing_and_calling -- 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. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/clojure/b6713010-47cc-4bd6-8073-d9d5d681d62cn%40googlegroups.com.
