ahhhhhhh I see. That makes sense. So it's not like procedural programming. You could see what I was trying to understand.
I didn't want case/swtich semantics. like the (cond) or if, else if style. I was trying to return at the first true thing, but it doesn't work like that. it always gets to expr3. the thing I thought was returning after expr1 was just an opportunity to do a side effect. Thanks. On Jan 11, 1:26 pm, "Eric Lavigne" <lavigne.e...@gmail.com> wrote: > > this seemed like a clean, nice way to merge to sorted lists into one > > sorted list. I'm not getting clojure syntax, it seems: > > > (defn listmerge [l1 l2] > > (let [l1first (first l1) l2first (first l2)] > > (if (= l1first nil) l2) > > (if (= l2first nil) l1) > > (if (< l1first l2first) > > (cons l1first (listmerge (rest l1) l2)) > > (cons l2first (listmerge (rest l2) l1))) > > )) > > > psuedocode: > > > listmerge (list l1, list l2): > > if l1 is empty, return l2 > > if l2 is empty return l1 > > if l1[0] is less than l2[0], > > return l1[0] + listmerge(rest(l1), l2) > > otherwise return l2[0] + listmerge(rest(l2), l1) > > Read James' answer first. I just wish to add something. > > When you say (let [bindings...] expr1 expr2 expr3) the result is the return > value of expr3. expr1 and expr2 return values are relevant, so the only > reason to have expr1 and expr2 is if they have side-effects, such as > changing the value of a Ref or updating a database or printing to the > terminal. > > -- > Education is what survives when what has been learned has been forgotten. > > - B. F. Skinner --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
