I agree with the op. While the language is still relatively young please break things so they sit better in the long term. Accurate and descriptive names are totally valueable, and I'm pretty handy with find/replace on the editor anyway :p
Aaron On Feb 15, 2009, at 10:43 AM, CuppoJava <patrickli_2...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > I'm also in support of the optimal names. Clojure is not too widely > used in production code yet, and it would be a shame to start > compromising design decisions for backwards compatibility already. > > This is actually one of my (and many other people's) favorite parts > about Clojure, the beauty of Lisp without the baggage. I wouldn't like > for Clojure to start carrying baggage of its own. > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
