On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 20:04, Stuart Halloway
<stuart.hallo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I find the suite of ->, ->>, anonymous functions, partial, and comp
> sufficient for my needs, with each having its place.
>
> My only grumble is that "partial" is a lot of characters. I would love
> a one-character alternative, if it could be reasonably intuitive.
>

F# uses >> for functional composition and |> for partial evaluation.
Both as infix operators, of course. Perhaps they'd work for clojure's
prefix syntax?

(def >> comp)
(def |> partial)

what do you think?

> Stu
>
>> On Oct 16, 10:22 pm, Sean Devlin <francoisdev...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> In order to generate closures, every function should take parameters
>>> first, and data at the end, so that they work well with partial.
>>
>> It's really hard to come up with a consistent practice that works well
>> for all scenarios.  Even clojure.core is inconsistent in this regard
>> -- the sequence fns take the seq at the end, the collection functions
>> (like assoc) take the collection first.
>>
>> Whichever way you design your functions, half the time the arguments
>> will be in the wrong place for what someone wants to do.  If you want
>> a purely compositional style, the only way to do it is to only allow
>> single-argument functions, a la Haskell.
>>
>> -SS
>> >
>
>
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to