FWIW: I have thought the same thing in the past. But, in practice, this has never been a problem for me. Not once. Now I haven't written quadrillions of lines of Lisp, but it doesn't seem to have been a problem for those who have either.
One thing to keep in mind is that you don't typically have tons of macros nebulously floating around all over the place. When you first learn about macros, they seem so cool and so powerful, and it seems like you will be writing as many macros as functions. But it turns out that a little goes a long way with macros. You just don't end up writing all that many. It's not really hard to keep track of which names are macros. "With functions, code is WYSIWYG". Well. Maybe. You still can't magically know what a function does just by looking at an application of it. Sure, its name and the context help, but if you're uncertain about a function you're going to have to look at the documentation or whatever anyway. It's not really any different with macros in the mix, ultimately. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
