On Jun 9, 7:49 am, Konrad Hinsen <konrad.hin...@laposte.net> wrote: > On 09.06.2009, at 07:31, Richard Newman wrote: > > > Has there been any thinking about supporting a 'bag' sibling of 'set', > > and allowing it to be passed correctly through the relational > > operators? Right now I have a choice between rephrasing my code in > > non- > > relational terms, or adding a unique value to each item to thwart the > > distinctness semantics. I can't help but think that other people will > > also encounter this. > > There's an outline of an implementation of multisets (I think that's > the same as your bags) at: > > http://code.google.com/p/clojure-contrib/source/browse/trunk/src/ > clojure/contrib/types/examples.clj
Google Collections has Multisets - and they have an immutable implementation. http://code.google.com/p/google-collections/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
