2 ms·

I'm not a clojure user but I am a fan of Rich's talks so I am kinda taken aback by this - this is just not the kind of Clojure I was expecting from what I know

I'm not a clojure user but I am a fan of Rich's talks so I am kinda taken aback by this - this is just not the kind of Clojure I was expecting from what I know of the principles Rich preaches. I really was expecting belt and braces defensive error checking and never ever giving a dud result.

mcguire 10y ago
It's a somewhat common problem with Lisps specifically and dynamically typed languages in general. Because the bottom-level operations won't let you do things that are completely idiotic, everything is "safe", so maintaining the sanctity[1] of higher level abstractions sometimes gets lost in the shuffle. I once wrote a blog post about related issues.[2] [1] Ok, so there are lots of terms with just slightly the wrong meanings. I came up with a new one. Sue me. [2] http://maniagnosis.crsr.net/2011/06/some-lisp-suggestions.html?m=1 http://maniagnosis.crsr.net/2011/06/some-lisp-suggestions.ht...