>>>> Please don't. It has already been discussed and declined. The metadata is >>>> uglier because we want doing this to be slightly ugly.. >>> >>> "We" do? Who is "we" and why does this "we" want doing this to be slightly >>> ugly? >> >> The Clojure/core team is led by its technical advisors, Rich Hickey and >> myself. In this particular case, I was on the fence and Rich called it. > > OK, that answers the first question, but not the second. What was > Rich's rationale?
I have started a wiki page "Why Feature X Was Declined" [1]. The def- variants are right where they should be: in a contrib library for people that need them. Stuart Halloway Clojure/core http://clojure.com [1] http://dev.clojure.org/display/design/Why+Feature+X+Was+Declined -- 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
