3 ms·
Out of curiosity, how are they more composable? I haven't used Enlive for a bit but the entire thing felt so smooth on that level (and all the others) I'm very
by runevault 16y ago
Out of curiosity, how are they more composable? I haven't used Enlive for a bit but the entire thing felt so smooth on that level (and all the others) I'm very curious to hear how it could be made better, or are they using tricks based on the type system?
- KirinDave 16y agoThe "NodeSeq -> NodeSeq" implicit construction method that DPP uses for his designer-friendly templates works so well because of the type system, yeah. Which is not to say Enlive doesn't tackle the problem head on with a lot of solid syntax. It's just the forms like clone-for aren't everywhere, and so the second you leave the comfort zone of the syntax you lose a lot of the elegance. This is the tradeoff between the two language approaches. The static type can carry it's DSL on its back implicitly, whereas the macro approach requires an explicit lexical tag.