Gregg Reynolds <d...@mobileink.com> writes: >> This is not side-effect free (sorry for pun). I did this for my code, >> and now slamhound doesn't work on it. Other tools too? I don't know. >> >> https://github.com/technomancy/slamhound/issues/61 > > > (load "foo") is legal Clojure; if a tool can't handle it, that's either a > bug or a deliberate limitation in the tool.
If you read the bug report, you will see that I agree. The slamhound developers don't and argue that (load "foo") is bad style. Who is right is not so relevant; that there is such an argument is. > So I wouldn't say that using "load" has side-effects that break tools, > but that some tools may make assumptions and have side-effects that do > nasty things to legal code (or "encourage" a particular style). I > would not be surprised if other tools make similar assumptions about > the structure of clojure source files. Then it's a question of whether > one wants to allow the limitations of tools to constrain one's use of > the language. Or whether one's use of the language limits the ability to use tools. I just make the statement that it good to know about these choices rather than to make them by chance. Phil -- 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/d/optout.
