> Four is better than 32, but still. I found the explanation for this on stackoverflow.com. Stuart Sierra wrote,
> This is due to the definition of =, which, when given a sequence of > arguments, forces the first 4: >> (defn = >> ;; ... other arities ... >> ([x y & more] >> (if (= x y) >> (if (next more) >> (recur y (first more) (next more)) >> (= y (first more))) >> false))) http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3407876 He also defined an unchunk function to prevent chunking. For completeness, I should also mention that Michael Fogus has written a different function for the same purpose: http://blog.fogus.me/2010/01/22/de-chunkifying-sequences-in-clojure/ -- 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
