> > Using an explicit tag or not is a minor detail but... > I'd argue that from the Clojure perspective it is not that minor. I think the absence of the distinction would ruin the experience for Clojure users.
> If you restrict an exchange format because some language(s) have no > literal support, > then you would be better exchanging crude bits... > I may have not made my point with Java and literals clear enough. It is supposed to serve as an analogy to emphasize the difference between native and non-native support for a feature. The difference in the mentioned example is huge enough that rarely anyone even bothers to provide/use API-based literals in Java. They just use imperative code to fill the structures. -- 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
