With apologies for 3 questions in 1 day: (def a {:foo {:cat 20 :dog 30} :bar "hi"})
(let [{{cat :cat dog :dog} :foo bar :bar} a] [cat dog bar]) (leth [{:foo {:cat cat :dog dog} :bar bar} a] [cat dog bar]) I don't understand the reason why existing let key destructuring is "backwards" To me, it seems the fictional leth example is much "simpler" -- the mental model is just "do pattern matching" The current let example seems to be: "okay, um, so for "cat", you look at :cat, then you look at :foo", then you think (:cat (:foo a)) -- which seems much more work and error prone. Question: Where can I read up on the rationale behind the current design of map destructuring in let? Thanks! -- -- 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 --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.