> Thanks. What I'm having trouble with is not the reference vs. value > semantics, but the order of evaluation. Clojure seems to be all over the map > on this; it's probably not as bad as it looks, but I'm accustomed to either > purely strict or purely lazy evaluation. I looked at the documentation for > "doseq" and "for", but they did not say anything about evaluation order; I > then looked at the source for "for", but reading it is a non-trivial task for > a lisp newb like myself.
The documentation strings for "for" state that it is lazy and rightmost-fastest. The docs for "doseq" are similarly specific: non-lazy for side effects, with ordering as per "for". Help me understand your confusion so I can improve the docstrings. Stu -- 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
