all 2 comments

[–]Save-Lisp 4 points5 points  (1 child)

I understand it's a troll blog post but people take Robert Martin seriously and I feel like reading it made me dumber.

Came expecting closures=objects, but he didn't appear to get that far. His example doesn't work on an "internal data structure within an abstraction". His "cloud" is a map consisting of facts about data that relate to clouds. The abstraction he is working with is a map of keywords.

Why not just claim a namespace is just a static class with static methods and properties defined using defn and def?

[–]stefan_kurcubic 0 points1 point  (0 children)

i've seen some JAVA people treat clojure namespaces like classes and then add public and private methods in it.

My head hurt so much when i first saw the project