Thanks Miekel. I can use the count version if it does not store the previous subseq in memory. Sunil.
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 5:38 PM, Meikel Brandmeyer (kotarak) <m...@kotka.de>wrote: > Hi, > > ah. Ok. I understand now your particular issue. Yes. Your approach is > perfectly feasible. By paying the price of calling f multiple times for an > element and realising each group twice you can make the two sequences > (take-while and drop-while) independent and hence don't retain the head of > the first group when realising the second group. With the count solution > the first group would have been also realised and kept in memory. However > since the take and drop are independent the first group is realised, but > thrown away immediatelly. > > Your posted solution should work fine. > > > Meikel > > -- > 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
