I do this too on occasion, and my opinion is: better to chase them in the REPL than in deployed code, because the same problem would usually come up there.
On Jan 7, 5:03 pm, Nicolas Buduroi <nbudu...@gmail.com> wrote: > I've been doing a lot of Clojure lately and, of all thing, > collection's laziness coupled with a REPL is what makes me loose the > most time. I really love having laziness built-in by default and I'm a > REPL-driven development addict, but sometimes I just loose minutes (if > not hours) chasing imaginary bugs that in the end only were a misuse > of laziness at the REPL. Still, I can't think of any way of fixing > this problem other than writing on top of my monitor: "If it doesn't > make sense it's certainly because of laziness". I wonder what other > people think about this problem? > > P.S.: While writing this I just got an idea, but I'm not really sure > it's a good one. Would it be wise to make the binding macro force > evaluation of its body? That would be the most common mistake I make. -- 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
