On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 12:22 PM, Cedric Greevey <cgree...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 11:59 PM, Ambrose Bonnaire-Sergeant
> <abonnaireserge...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 11:46 AM, Cedric Greevey <cgree...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> So ... any further objections, other than "it's unlikely anyone cares
> >> enough to bother actually making such a change"? :)
> >
> > It breaks the uniformity of Clojure syntax.
> >
> > Almost all sugar is prefix: you can identify syntax by looking to the
> left
> > of the form.
> >
> > #{1}
> > (fn [a b & c]) (variable arity, left of "c")
> > #'var
> > '(1 2 3)
> > {:a 1}
> >
> > I remember Rich Hickey explaining this in a discussion with Daniel
> Spiewak.
>
> Isn't this just another way of saying "humans will have to read to the
> end to see what the form is?" I provided a response to that objection
> already.
>
>
Your response missed the point.
<> is better, objectively, with respect to complecting recognizing syntax
and reading entire forms.
Thanks,
Ambrose
--
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
