Hmmm.

Thank you for the post.

Questions of laziness apart, I know that recursion has been proven to
be equivalent to iterations (expect to weed out interview candidates,
as per Steve Yege's remarks :-)

But then why would we want any of `doseq', `dotimes' or `doall', and
if we do, is that set complete, and with respect to what design
principle?

For example, CL provides `do-symbols', `do-all-symbols' or `with-
package-iterator' as "external" iterators.

Clojure decided that anything that could be expressed as a `seq' could
be iterated over using `doseq', so I can express the equivalent of
CL's (do-symbols ...) using clojure (doseq [n all-ns] ....)

To rephrase the question differently, what could exist that is not a
clojure `seq' that we would want to iterate over?

Clojure already answers this (partially?) by providing (dotimes ...)
(as CL does) to iterate over a zero based consecutive and finite
sequence of numbers. Though the same (dotimes ...) could be _used_ to
iterate over any finite range)

What are the things that one could iterate over, for which clojure
does not, currently, provide special cases à la `doseq' or 'dotimes' ?

I can't think of any, but that's just my poor lack of imagination :-)

Many thanks.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to