On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 8:29 AM, Rich Hickey <richhic...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Would you ever expect to use fdef/instrument active in production for > validation > > No, definitely not. It’s that kind of runtime checking (and expense) that > gives some dynamic lang checking systems a bad rep. > > The philosophy is - generative testing has made sure your function > complies with the specs. So, testing the :ret and :fn properties over and > over is redundant and serves no point. > > OTOH, you may encounter user- or externally-supplied data at runtime and > want to use the facilities of spec to validate/process it. Then you can use > valid? or conform *explicitly* to do so. > > The intent is that running with wrappers (instrumentation) should be done > only during testing. This seems like an important point, that didn't really come through (for me at least) in the docs so far. I was wondering about the runtime perf implications and what the expected usage patterns would be. Perhaps something worth emphasizing to the community. -- 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/d/optout.
