I think different people will need slightly different things for this and it's pretty trivial to write, so not sure it's worth adding. Others have asked about it though.
On Wednesday, June 8, 2016 at 8:19:31 AM UTC-5, Nikita Prokopov wrote: > > Hi! > > I noticed there’s no conform variant that throws instead of returning > keyword in clojure.spec. Is it intentional? > > I’m asking because it seems repetitive to check return value, then call > explain-data, and create an exception with explain-data in it. Maybe > there’s a better way to use clojure.spec? > > Nikita. > -- 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.
