I very much like the -?> and -?>> macros and fine them pretty useful. I'd support their addition into core.
Also, regarding Konrad's comment: I also find a lot of random one-off things in old contrib that I think are useful to use as well as to read through some of the source. I think something like a solid Monad library deserves a place in contrib, and other smaller packages should be combed for useful nuggets and rolled into comprehensive, cohesive libraries. Paul On Apr 18, 11:49 am, Konrad Hinsen <konrad.hin...@fastmail.net> wrote: > On 18 Apr 2011, at 17:47, Laurent PETIT wrote: > > > The -?> and -?>> macros are currently inside "old", "soon to be > > deprecated" clojure contrib. > > I must confess that I don't even know what those macros do, so I have > no opinion. > > However, I think the question of "what will happen to module > clojure.contrib.XXX" is of wider interest. Only very few modules/ > sublibraries have made it into the "new contrib". OK, many of the old > ones (including some of mine) are experiments and probably not used by > anyone any more. But there's a lot in between: useful and used code > that for whatever reason does not satisfy the stricter criteria > (whatever they are) of "new contrib". > > Concerning my own modules in old contrib, there are three that I use > myself and that I am planning to maintain, independently of where they > will end up: > - clojure.contrib.monads > - clojure.contrib.macro-utils > - clojure.contrib.generic > > If nothing else is decided collectively, I'll maintain them as private > projects on Google Codes or Bitbucket. > > Konrad. -- 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 Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. 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
