On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 9:20 AM, larry <larrye2...@gmail.com> wrote: > (defn adder[n] > (let [x n] > (fn[y] (+ y x)))) > > Is the let necessary? It seems redundant.
Can you provide a specific reference to where the example appears in Joy of Clojure (page number)? I assume the actual example in context is trying to illustrate something specific. No, let isn't needed here, it just serves to introduce a new name for the argument n (and probably make it clearer that the body of adder is a closure). -- Sean A Corfield -- (904) 302-SEAN An Architect's View -- http://corfield.org/ World Singles, LLC. -- http://worldsingles.com/ "Perfection is the enemy of the good." -- Gustave Flaubert, French realist novelist (1821-1880) -- 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
