This page is not created by, affiliated with, or supported by Slack Technologies, Inc.
2018-01-06
Channels
- # architecture (17)
- # beginners (118)
- # boot (22)
- # cider (9)
- # clara (38)
- # cljs-dev (4)
- # clojure (213)
- # clojure-austin (4)
- # clojure-greece (1)
- # clojure-italy (4)
- # clojure-russia (5)
- # clojure-spec (7)
- # clojure-uk (5)
- # clojurescript (3)
- # cursive (21)
- # datascript (3)
- # datomic (31)
- # duct (12)
- # emacs (9)
- # graphql (5)
- # gsoc (1)
- # hoplon (9)
- # leiningen (2)
- # off-topic (37)
- # om (2)
- # onyx (2)
- # parinfer (5)
- # perun (4)
- # reagent (2)
- # spacemacs (1)
- # specter (25)
is there anything to read at length about "don't do the coercion"? It makes sense here and there, but I'd like to see the bigger picture
If you build coercion into your spec, particularly lossy coercion, then you have made a decision for all consumers of your spec that they have no choice over
is the recommendation for coercion use-cases "do it by hand outside the spec'd zone"?
so objection is not about coercion, but about complecting it with specs? Or even about lossy (in any way) specs?
@misha right. I have no problem with coercion as a concept. :)
I on the other hand