https://github.com/roomkey/annotate is another possibility
- James On 23 August 2015 at 02:06, Colin Yates <colin.ya...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Dave, it _isn't_ an Illegal argument though :-), your destructuring > is simply ignoring that parameter. > > However, I get the pain and solutions might be (in order of 'heavyness'): > - http://blog.fogus.me/2009/12/21/clojures-pre-and-post/ > - https://github.com/Prismatic/schema > - http://typedclojure.org/ > > HTH > > Dave Tenny writes: > > > I sure wish Clojure would generate "IllegalArgumentException" in the > > following sample case: > > > > (defn foo [a b & {:keys [c d]}] 1) > > (foo 1 2 :e 5) ; blithely ignores :e 5 > > > > I understand that Clojure's destructuring things are very nice, and more > > powerful than Common Lisp's, and I like > > that when I need it. > > > > However I can't tell you how many times I've been bitten by this. Some > > simple typo or other other parameter name error on keyword arguments > > with untended and way-too-long-to-debug consequences. > > > > In my mind, on this subject, Common Lisp lambda lists got this right and > > Clojure gets a poor grade. > > Something about being doomed to repeat history. In Common Lisp, if you > > really wanted to allow other (arbitrary) keywords you'd > > just use &allow-other-keys. > > > > Maybe clojure should only allow the above case to go un-complained-about > if > > :as was specified for the map. > > > > If there's some automatic enforcement I'm missing that comes with 'defn' > > please let me know, I'm still learning the language. > > > > I've thought more that once about making a common lisp DEFUN statement > that > > maps to DEFN but implements > > lambda list semantics (including 'supplied-p' parameters). I've just > been > > too lazy to do it. > > > > It would also likely perform poorly after injecting the additional > > checks/rearrangements into the function on top of what Clojure has > already > > done, > > so I suppose it would have to be taken a step further so that it didn't > > generate DEFN expressions at all but was implemented at DEFN's level as > > a seperately named form. > > > > Tips welcome. Just thinking aloud. > > > > - Dave > > -- > Sent with my mu4e > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
