> So, it's all some form of RTFM... but one could argue that this novel use of > commas in the syntax results in adding a little "incidental complexity" to > the language ;-)
You put some pretty specific assumptions into your code: commas as separators, commas with a "proper" place in Clojure syntax, optional values in lists, nil for no-value, keys gotta be keywords (you don't get a wrong result, you get what you put in). No wonder it gets complex. A comma is whitespace and maps take pairs, that's the contrary of incidental complexity. BTW, I don't use commas and I make the odd count error often enough. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.
