> Waiting for the Clojure and Scala version. :-}
But there won't be. Not ever. Not really. The reason I prefer Clojure over
Javascript or Ruby is because so much care and thought went into the APIs
of Clojure's core structures and syntax. If you try really hard, you can
find the occasional article about some unusual choices that the Clojure
core team has made, but you won't find anything quite as crazy "wat - 1" ==
NaN.
You look at the way the core team waited to figure out how to handle the
passing of data structures to functions, and the beautiful style of
destructuring that emerged -- that's the history of Clojure in a nutshell.
I am willing to believe that there are some Haskell fanatics who find
aspects of Clojure funny, but the point of the lighting talk was about
things that are obviously wrong:
[] + {}
Object
{} + []
0
Can you think of anything in Clojure that is as crazy as that?
On Friday, September 23, 2016 at 12:01:30 PM UTC-4, Alan Moore wrote:
>
> Thanks for the laugh! Waiting for the Clojure and Scala version. :-}
>
> Alan
>
--
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.
