Hi, On Apr 1, 11:10 am, Per Vognsen <per.vogn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Unless you want to argue that core is magical, I don't see how you > could possibly maintain that claim of consistency. As I said: exceptions in core are disputable, eg. /, ns, etc. Clojure being still young and in flux at certain areas doesn't contradict a currently valid, authoritative documentation. It may be that the list for allowed characters in a symbol is extended at some point in time. However this does not mean that the current list is not authoritative now, but only that at that point in time it will be replaced with a new list which is just as authoritative from then on. Hypothetically: the list could stay as it is now and in core things are renamed to le, eq and divide. Unlikely but possible. I don't think, that fluxiness of a project does invalidate documentation. In particular when the project leader referred several times to the existing documentation as authoritative. Sincerely Meikel -- 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 To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.
