On Dec 5, 9:03 am, "Stephen C. Gilardi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Dec 5, 2008, at 8:50 AM, Mark McGranaghan wrote:
>
> > This is indeed the definition used in the clojure.contrib.pred
> > library:
> >http://github.com/kevinoneill/clojure-contrib/tree/master/src/clojure...
>
> That's true. However, with Clojure now having a specific meaning for
> "atom" that's different from that of the larger Lisp world, I'm
> wondering if it would be a good idea to remove atom? from pred.clj.
>
> Feedback welcome.
>
atom?/p is not one of strongest or best-named abstractions in older
Lisps. Maybe it made sense in a world with only one composite data
structure. Good riddance I say.
Rich
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
