How about while? (while not-finished (do stuff ...))
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 4:23 AM, Nathan Sorenson <n...@sfu.ca> wrote: > Quite often I convince myself I need state or some effectful trigger, but > further thought reveals a simpler stateless approach. > > That being said--if you absolutely need to be doing something based on > effects, something that absolutely can't be tracked via values in a purely > functional way--like polling a queue once per second (functional-reactive > programming notwithstanding), I personally prefer straight loop/recur to the > list processing functions. In my mind, usings seq/filter/map suggests you > are doing something lazy, referentially transparent, and composable. If you > are not doing that, a loop recur signals to me you are manipulating the > execution flow in a precise way. > > But again, I always try to find a way to avoid dealing with the messy > stateful world until the last possible moment. Lots of application logic can > be completely pure with one small "write to file"-type operation at the end. > > -- > 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 > -- 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
