On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 10:45 PM, Michael Gardner <gardne...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Dec 6, 2010, at 9:02 PM, Ken Wesson wrote: > >> I'll try this one more time. You suggested the innards, and with them >> the seq order of the elements, might get rearranged. > > I suggested no such thing; perhaps you are confusing me with Mike Meyer?
Actually, the "you" in my post was a generic "you", meaning "whoever's arguing against this". > I referred more generally to the possibility of two different calls to (seq) > on > the same collection returning the items in different orders. The only plausible reason I can think of for this to happen IS if the innards get rearranged "behind the scenes" to, say, better support structure-sharing. This is why I considered yours and Meyer's positions to be equivalent enough to address them both with a single argument containing a generic "you". -- 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
