We try to keep a civil tone here; please do likewise.



On Jul 6, 11:36 am, Greg <g...@kinostudios.com> wrote:
> On Jul 6, 2010, at 2:26 PM, Wilson MacGyver wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 2:01 PM, Stuart Halloway
> > <stuart.hallo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> In my experience, unneeded versatility == support headache.
>
> > I couldn't agree more. I'm happy to see selection of what goes into
> > core and contrib has become more selective.
>
> Yes, let's handicap ourselves and then disparage a useful macro as "unneeded."
>
> The -> and ->> macros aren't needed either, so why are they there?
>
> While we're at it, we should make it so that the + function takes only two 
> arguments because any more leads to "unneeded versatility" and therefore, 
> apparently, to "support headache." :-p
>
> - Greg
>
>
>
>
>
> > --
> > Omnem crede diem tibi diluxisse supremum.
>
> > --
> > 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

Reply via email to