> (reduce (fn [model f] (assoc model f (inc (get model f 1))))
> {} features))
>
> Do Clojurians usually arrange like that? Can it be rearrange for more
> understandability?
I can't speak for everyone, but I don't think it's common to jam
*everything* on one line. I imagine Rich was laying out for space on
slides.
For maximum readability I would arrange that thusly:
(reduce
(fn [model f]
(assoc model
f (inc (get model f 1))))
{}
features))
or, less verbosely
(reduce
(fn [model f]
(assoc model f (inc (get model f 1))))
{} features))
--
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
