This is covered in the coding standards doc [1]: "Use type hints for functions that are likely to be on critical code; otherwise keep code simple and hint-free."
Reusable libraries are a strong candidate for type hinting. [1] http://www.assembla.com/wiki/show/clojure/Clojure_Library_Coding_Standards > 2010/5/28 Michael Gardner <gardne...@gmail.com> > On May 28, 2010, at 12:42 PM, Laurent PETIT wrote: > > > The rule should really always be: no warning at all (with > > *warn-on-reflection* set to true, of course). > > I strongly disagree. Why should you care about those sorts of warnings unless > you've already identified a bottleneck that needs elimination? > > > Said differently than my previous answer : consider removing warnings as the > act of keeping your code in a good state/shape. I tend to not get rid of > warnings enough in my own java code, but for clojure production code, I would > take warnings wayy more seriously than e.g. java warnings. > > My 0,02€, > > -- > Laurent > > > -- > 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 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
