On Oct 3, 2008, at 9:50 AM, Paul Barry wrote: > The fact that contains? is semantically different than > java.util.Collection#contains is confusing. If contains? was called > contains-key?, that would be more intuitive and map to how it works in > Java.
Several times I've made the mental note: when I see contains? I need to think contains-key?. I think changing the name to contains-key? would make the meaning very clear. Also, if you're dealing with values that are known not to be false or nil (which I suspect is a common case), (contains? m k) is equivalent to (m k). Typing the extra "-key?" seems worth it for its clarity in the "false or nil is possible" case. --Steve --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
