Hi, playing devil's advocate:
Am Freitag, 14. Dezember 2012 06:51:43 UTC+1 schrieb puzzler: > > It's interesting that most of the solutions presented here involve > something along the lines of immigrate / potemkin / redefine (in your > piplin code). With so many people reinventing the same wheel, it would > seem that this really is a key piece to solving the problem of putting a > friendly API on top of functions that implementation-wise are split across > a number of namespaces. Makes me think that this is an important enough > tool to be in core. One might also challenge your assumption that the implementations have to go into their own namespace. If they don't provide any API to the outside user, what is the point in putting them into a different namespace? You can still use load to split the implementations accross different files to keep things organised if that is your main concern. Kind regards Meikel -- 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
