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