I know it won't matter, but for posterity if nothing else...
Functions named contains-key? and contains-val? would make a lot more
sense to me than the current contains? and new seq-contains?. Anyone
looking at contains-val? should expect it to be O(n). The only
effective difference would be that the test value for contains-val? is
consistently a single value rather than a [key value] tuple for maps.
Lists:
(contains-key? '(:foo :bar) 0)
Exception
(contains-val? '(:foo :bar) :foo)
true
Vectors:
(contains-key? [:foo :bar] 0)
true
(get [:foo :bar] 0)
:foo
(contains-key? [:foo :bar] 2)
false
(contains-val? [:foo :bar] :foo)
true
(contains-val? [:foo :bar] :baz)
false
Maps:
(contains-key? {:foo :bar} :foo)
true
(get {:foo :bar} :foo)
:bar
(contains-key? {:foo :bar} :baz)
false
(contains-val? {:foo :bar} :bar)
true
(contains-val? {:foo :bar} :baz)
false
Sets:
(contains-key? #{:foo :bar} :foo)
true
(get #{:foo :bar} :foo)
:foo
(contains-key? #{:foo :bar} :baz)
false
(contains-val? #{:foo :bar} :foo)
true
(contains-val? #{:foo :bar} :baz)
false
--
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
