On Tuesday, March 12, 2013 1:22:20 PM UTC+1, Dave Kincaid wrote: > Before long Clojure will have as much ugly, arcane syntax as Scala. (I say > that mostly tongue in cheek, btw).
Clojure is way behind Scala on this score :) > For me, a lot of the attractiveness of Lisp languages is the minimal > syntax that they have. I'm not a fan of adding more to Clojure than is > already there. I'm just one voice and a very new one to Clojure, so I doubt > my opinion will sway anyone else. I do love Clojure and hope to be able to > use it more in the future, but I'll probably stick to the very basic syntax > and forgo all this fancy sugar. One way this will backfire is that you'll get mad and frustrated each time you read anyone else's idiomatic Clojure code. There really isn't that much of it around and any LISP has its own bag of idiosyncrasies. Do you know the Common Lisp *loop* construct? Or its *map*<http://www.lispworks.com/documentation/HyperSpec/Body/f_mapc_.htm> * menagerie? Now *that*'s what I call arcane, and what really did turn me off of CL. -Marko -- -- 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 --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
