Indeed. I'd argue it's better not to have unused code in the codebase in the first place, regardless of what the Closure compiler does to help when it comes to compiling assets.
I haven't tested this with cljs projects, but on the face of it I don't see why Yagni's methodology wouldn't work. If you get a chance to give it a try I'd love the feedback :) On Wednesday, June 24, 2015 at 2:58:14 PM UTC-7, juan.facorro wrote: > > That's a good point. > > On Wednesday, June 24, 2015 at 6:53:43 PM UTC-3, Fluid Dynamics wrote: >> >> FMIIW, but I think they serve orthogonal purposes. Google Closure finds >> code (mostly library parts your program doesn't use) that your particular >> program doesn't need and omits it from the build to save disk and >> bandwidth. Yagni finds obsolete code that is no longer reached in your >> program or from *any* public entry point to your library (whether a >> particular program uses that entry point or not) and issues warnings, so >> you know that either something is maintenance deadweight or you have a bug >> because you *meant* to call it somewhere but forgot, or it's become >> accidentally shadowed or something. >> > -- 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.
