On Jan 14, 12:01 am, GS <gsincl...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Jan 14, 2:27 pm, "Mark Engelberg" <mark.engelb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I also find the choice of some/not-any? as opposites to be hard to > > remember. I'd rather it be some/not-some? or any/not-any? > > I think some and any? both have their place. > > (let [foo (some prime? numseq)] > (do something with foo)) > > (if (any? composite? numseq) > ; we haven't finished factorising > > That is hastily made-up pseudocode, of course. The point it: 'any? > looks like a predicate, as it should. 'some doesn't, so it's a > nuisance when it is used as a predicate. > > Personally, I'd prefer 'some be called 'find or 'find-first, but I'm > not arguing in favour of that; that's simply a preference. > > Gavin
+1 I think some consistency is in order. This would both: a) Help beginners find the duality of a given function more easily, and b) Make the code read better, IMHO. -Ryan --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
