That's a concise and clear way to summarize the issue. If you compare the IDE support required for different languages, the support required to write syntactically correct Clojure code is pretty small compared to others.
I do not get it, it's longer and much more painful to write Java code with all these required delimiters (parenthesis required in a if/while/for condition, semi-colons to split for loop expressions, statements, curly braces to create compound statements...). These are different requirements depending where you are in your code. Without hefty IDE support, you would be left nude on the ice bank. When HP introduced their pocket calculator with Postfix notation, people had to get used to it but it did not prevent HP calculators to become popular ones in the engineering/scientific/accountants community. Ok you would not expect your grocery store owner to use one but he's not building bridges or a creating a new cancer cure either. People bought HP calculators not for the Postfix notation but for all the others things it offered at the time... Luc On Fri, 2009-12-18 at 17:58 -0800, Vagif Verdi wrote: > Welcome to the big club of people who in last 50 years came up with a > "brilliant" idea to "fix" lisp. > > As for Ten parentheses, i do not see a single one. Noone notices > starting parens because they are markers saying "this is a function". > And of course noone notices ending parens because they are for your > IDE, not for the human. > -- 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
