> What really puzzles me is that it doesn't seem to be generally > regarded as idiomatic Clojure style to just use top-level (let)s for > your "private" globals. This has lots of benefits: > > - If you do this you can make them actually, genuinely private, rather > than just marked as "please don't use this" > - You get more self-documenting source code: (let [x 1] (defn foo [] > (...use x...))) is clear about how and where x will be used, while > (def- x 1) (defn foo [] (...use x...)) leaves open the possibility > that x is important all over the namespace. > - You avoid runtime var-deref costs for constants that will never > change. > > I find this style so useful and readable that I'm curious why it isn't > more popular in the community at large.
Top-level lets make it more difficult for tools to statically analyze code. Of course said tools are largely hypothetical at present. :-) Stu Stuart Halloway Clojure/core http://clojure.com -- 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
