Clojurians Log v2

@michael348 regarding: "I'm very curious what that would look like, if so." IMHO: In this fantasy, not too much would be different about the Clojure core (some of it could've been elided, though). clojure.core/into with a transducer is a great way to build a collection today (perhaps even The Best Way), but seqs are still more 'within reach' in some way that involves momentum the community has thinking with seqs, and also plenty of code written that way, more than it involves anything about the shape of the core libraries today. My intuition is that, in this fantasy world, when building collections almost everybody would be reaching for into + transducers now, instead of the ->> full of seq transformations, that seqs would be much less common, that the core would be a little smaller without e.g. the non-transducer arities of map,filter plus the core.async versions of the same... So the core could've been a little simpler that way, but I suspect we're not missing out on much.

If a local state is mutated in the forest and no one is around to observe it, does it make a sound?

After revisiting re-frame docs, I wonder if anyone is separating the backend business/domain logic into events, pure event handlers, and effectfull functions?