On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 3:32 PM, Vincent Foley <vfo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'm opposed to this idea. I don't think we should pander to the > masses by creating a schism between new and experienced users. New > users should be introduced to the real thing immediately and it is up > to the tutorials and community to help them overcome the fear/ > puzzlement of parentheses. Like many other people have mentioned, > parentheses are not there just to be different, they're an integral > part of Clojure's power and hiding that fact from users will just > prevent them from using Clojure the way it's meant to. > Even though it shouldn't be included in clojure and I'm skeptical about its usefulness, it's a bad idea to tell people what they can or can't code. What's the problem with parentheses anyway? It's the same as in Java > except you move the opening parentheses to the left of the function > name (and with Clojure, you don't even need to remove the commas!): > > foo(bar, baz) => (foo bar, baz) > > Vincent. The problem is (+ 1 2) which is unlike how you normally do maths and that parens determine scope and flow while you need braces in java to do that. You are saying that parens are what makes Clojure powerful and then you say they are just like Java's. Sorry, you can't have it both ways. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
