Stefan,
I'm not sure what the output should look like, so it's hard for me to create
a tested version. However, I came up with the following code that is similar
to what you've written.
(defn move2ascii [i]
(let [x (/ i 100) y (mod i 100)]
(letfn [(row [i] (-> i (/ 8) (+ 1))) (col [i] (-> i (mod 8) (+ 97)
char))]
(str (col x) (row x) (col y) (row y)))))
As Laurent says, you wouldn't write Clojure the way you wrote your first
example any more than you'd do that in Scala. You might not find the
versions that Laurent and I put together readable either, but I'm not a big
fan of the Scala version so I think that's a matter of taste. If you want to
learn Clojure, grab a book and go for it. If you don't like lisp syntax, you
probably aren't going to like Clojure.
Cheers, Jay
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 10:40 AM, Laurent PETIT <laurent.pe...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Hello,
>
> don't let anybody convince you that clojure code should be both
> compact and unreadable for common mortals to deserve the right to be
> called idiomatic !
>
> The first example which you consider "clojure style" is unredeable !
>
> I tried several variations of coding this in clojure (not tested)
>
> here: http://pastebin.com/4G5DN3Jw
>
> IMO, Idiomatic clojure code is more in corerctly using the different
> parts: correct separation of state and identity, right balance between
> functions / multimethods / macros / (coming in 1.2) protocols, prefer
> higher order functions if they do not impact on readability and/or
> performance, etc.
>
> HTH,
>
> --
> Laurent
>
> 2010/5/19 edlich <edl...@gmail.com>:
> > Dear Community,
> >
> > I have one question about readability. As I am not yet deep into
> > Clojure I can only post scala but I am sure you will get my point.
> >
> > Recently I wrote the following dump function in Scala:
> >
> > // convert 1228 to "e2e4"
> > def move2ascii(move: Int): String = { // Clojure Style
> > (((move / 100) % 8 + 97).toChar).toString + ((move / 100) / 8 +
> > 1).toString +
> > (((move % 100) % 8 + 97).toChar).toString + ((move %
> > 100) / 8 + 1).toString
> > }
> >
> > but I could as well have written it like this in an imprative style:
> > (both are equal)
> >
> > def move2ascii(move: Int): String = { // Scala Style
> > val f1 = move / 100
> > val f2 = move % 100
> > val row1 = f1 / 8 + 1 // 2 von e2
> > val row2 = f2 / 8 + 1 // 4 von e4
> > val col1 = (f1 % 8 + 97).toChar // 5 = e von e2
> > val col2 = (f2 % 8 + 97).toChar // 5 = e von e4
> > col1.toString + row1.toString + col2.toString + row2.toString
> > }
> >
> > I am sure if you write the first function in Clojure it would look
> > nearly the same.
> >
> > My point and my question is:
> >
> > Isn't the second function easier to read? I know there had been a lot
> > of threads about readability
> > in clojure but I am not yet convinced.
> > In the second version the brain can rely on some steps inbetween which
> > make it more readable
> > for me. Or should the first function be split up into several more
> > functions to become more readable?
> >
> > I would be happy if you convince me to give Clojure a better chance.
> >
> > Thanks in advance
> > Stefan Edlich
> >
> > P.S.: It's nice to see the upcoming Clojure book in Manning!
> >
> > --
> > 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<clojure%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>
> > For more options, visit this group at
> > http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
>
> --
> 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<clojure%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
>
--
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
