On Feb 5, 2:20 pm, Niels Aan de Brugh <niels...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi there. > > A quick question about cond and condp. The latter has a nice feature > that allows the re-use of a test-expression result in the result part > of a clause. I figure it can be quite handy in the cond macro as well. > For example: > > (cond > ;; ... > (some (fn [[k v]] (some-test v)) col) :>> first > ;; ... > ) > > This code would return the key of the first element in col that passes > some-test. If no such value exists, 'some' returns nil and the check > further down are processed. > > I could of course write: > > (condp (fn [x _] x) nil > ;; clauses here, optionally using :>> > ) > > to get the same effect. > > user> (condp (fn [x _] x) nil false 2 3 :>> inc :else -1) > 4 > > But is there a more idiomatic way? Is there perhaps something in > contrib that I should be aware of? > > Niels
I believe there was some talk of adding :>> to cond. Short of that, I frequently use 'some with 'or as the else: (or (some inc [2]) -1) -- 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
