That would make it so you can't do "use" on com.rpl.rama. Since Rama is a full language, doing a "use" on the namespace is generally preferred as otherwise you would have to write "rama/" everywhere, which is irritating.
I also don't like overloading "defn" with something that's completely different. Also, a deframafn is more than a Clojure defn since it can emit to other output streams.
Comments
Why not rama/defop and rama/defn?
That would make it so you can't do "use" on com.rpl.rama. Since Rama is a full language, doing a "use" on the namespace is generally preferred as otherwise you would have to write "rama/" everywhere, which is irritating.
I also don't like overloading "defn" with something that's completely different. Also, a deframafn is more than a Clojure defn since it can emit to other output streams.