+1 On Sep 20, 4:43 am, Sean Corfield <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 4:19 PM, Dennis Haupt <[email protected]> > wrote: > > an advantage i see is very, very concise code since you have no type > > annotations at all. the downside is that exactly this code might be > > unreadable - because you just have no idea what it uses and what it > > does without tests or documentation. > > I find Clojure code more readable because it is generic. Instead of > some algorithm specialized by type, Clojure often deals with simpler > generic algorithms that are applicable to a broader class of data > structures which can also mean more reuse. > > Writing truly generic code in the presence of a strong type system is > often harder word and tends to produce much more dense, more annotated > code that I find harder to understand. Take a look at the > documentation for the Scala collection library, for example (I'm not > dissing Scala - I like Scala, but I don't think anyone will disagree > that the auto-generated documentation based on the library type > signatures is very hard to read, at least for the "average > developer"). > -- > Sean A Corfield -- (904) 302-SEAN > An Architect's View --http://corfield.org/ > World Singles, LLC. --http://worldsingles.com/ > Railo Technologies, Inc. --http://www.getrailo.com/ > > "Perfection is the enemy of the good." > -- Gustave Flaubert, French realist novelist (1821-1880)
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
