Recently, in my code, I have been struggling with which of the two
equivalent forms is, in a general sense, "better".
(defn my-fn1 [input]
(let [value1 (op1 input)
value2 (op2 input)
value3 (op4 value1 value2)]
(op5 value3)))
(defn my-fn2 [input]
(op5 (op4 (op1 input) (op2 input))))
Now, the second is definitely cleaner and more elegant, besides being
smaller, which is a non-trivial benefit when I have a fair amount of
code to page through.
However, if I've been away from the code awhile, it's much easier to
come back determine what the code is doing when its written the first
way, especially when it uses descriptive names. An operation that is
impenetrable when written in nested form can become quite simple when
each step is broken down and labeled.
Clojure is my first Lisp - should I just stick with the second form
until I learn to "see through" the nested s-expressions?
It's not that I'm trying to make my code more imperative - Although I
come from a Java background, I love functional programming, and it is
a delight to see how much I can do without side-effects. But I do miss
the self-documentation that well-named variables can provide.
Any thoughts? Also, is there any performance degradation from the
first way, or can the compiler optimize it away?
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
