[fulafel]

I find the stack traces to be fine as long as there's some middleware in use to filter out the Java stack frames from non-Clojure code, like eg CIDER does (and probably other envs can too). Otherwise they have some noise which is a bit annoying but not showstopper.

println (or other logging/tracing, eg using tap) works for seeing where things go wrong, but stepping through code with a debugger works too if you're so inclined, or experimeting at the repl.

Sure, it's not always obvious what caused bad input that evnetually leads to an uncaught exception, just like in other languages.. it might have come through an event loop or other layer of indirection that doesn't show the real caller, for example.

[geokon]

right, it's not like you're completely stuck with no way to figure out what's causing your problems. In pretty much every language you can get a crash stack and pepper print/logging statements. And sure, the Clojure stacks aren't always impenetrable (unless it's blowing up in some call back or lazy evaluation.. then good luck). But I don't think it should be brushed under the rug that that the debug situation in Clojure is problematic.. and it's behind ancient creaking languages like Elisp and the much laughed at C++. The REPL is great for sure, and it makes punching out code much faster, but when you need to debug some deep problem I start to miss GDB a bit :)

Next time I'm in a bind I'll have to try `scope-capture`. It looks like it might get me half way there

[fulafel]

Valid point about laziness, it can make for head scratchy stack traces. A debugger works well for that as well. I think the lazy by default behaviour of many things in the stdlib is a questionable design decision, and try to use eager versions of functions my default (eg mapv and filterv).