I think this further reinforces the need for a clj-lint of sorts. I know I have accidentally declared variables, fns, etc. in both def- derivative forms and in let-style forms that have shadowed a var that was in use somewhere else higher up. It would be handy to have a tool I could run over my source that would highlight instances such as this and many other instances of non-idiomatic code.
Just like any other lint program, you would probably end up ignoring the advice of the checker, but it's still nice to have it pointed out to you. On Sep 18, 2009, at 7:06 PM, Sean Devlin wrote: > > For what it's worth, I try to follow the convention Rich uses in core > > f - for a function > pred - for a predicate > coll - for a collection > body - for macro bodys > name - symbol definition > params - bindings > > Just my $.02 > > Sean > > On Sep 18, 6:37 pm, CuppoJava <patrickli_2...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> John illustrates a common scenario in Clojure. Clojure's built-in >> functions are tersely and sensibly named. The problem is that there >> is >> indeed a finite number of terse and sensible names... which bites you >> when you need some of those names. Hence why in my code I have >> started >> to just capitalize variables. >> >> In my code: A "function" is something that is executed in its lexical >> scope. >> -Patrick > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
