What about some sort of lint program? I'm thinking about something like pylint for clojure with configurable rules, but which will default to the standards agreed upon bu the clojure community. Even if you don't follow the rules 100%, it could be useful to see where you are deviating to be sure you really mean to in that situation. Plus it'd be a good coding exercise.
-Mitch On Dec 30, 12:50 am, "Mark H." <mark.hoem...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Dec 29, 1:15 pm, "Mark Volkmann" <r.mark.volkm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > It's early enough in the life of Clojure that we haven't developed any > > deeply held habits yet. I think it would be a good idea for you and > > other Clojure committers to at least suggest the way you think things > > should be done in code. If you think surrounding names of constants > > with plus signs is a good way to identify them as such, I'll gladly > > start doing that for the sake of consistency. I don't think it's a > > good idea for all of us to simply do what feels good because that will > > make it harder to read code written by others. > > Indeed, standards are good, but I do think part of the "Lisp way" (for > good or ill) is to treat such standards less like dogma and more like > gentle admonitions. > > There does seem to be a little of a "culture clash" latent in this > discussion, between those with the "Lisp ethos" and those with the > "Java ethos." It has very little to do with naming conventions for > variables, and very much to do with the level of playfulness and > academic interest one has when approaching a new programming > language: do I ask, "ooo, how many lines of code do I need in order > to express this infinite data structure?" or "how do I get my Web 2.0 > application up and running with the least effort?". Both of these are > good questions to ask: every serious computer science task needs both > application to motivate theory, and theory to improve existing > applications and inspire new ones. It's fun to see a language like > Clojure motivate both groups of people and get them talking -- Rich > has done great work in that respect by taking suggestions from both > groups and creating the space for them to interact. > > It might be fun to make a list of books that folks on one side could > read to get the sense of how the other side thinks. > > mfh --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
