> > Ordering problem aside, I'd argue this is not an unreasonable amount of > code for what seems to me a pretty rare set of requirements. Most people > who want a same-type segment from the middle of an ordered collection > (which is already uncommon in my experience) are probably either using > vectors already or at least know what type they're operating on. > > > If I cannot keep the type of an ordered collection (OD for short later. thanks for the name), that makes generic treatment of an OD really difficult, because functions like "conj" and "into" will have different behaviors on different concrete types. I really cannot "keep ordering problem aside" (why we call them "ordered collection", right?).
I have to say, for me certain things in Clojure are really weird and do not feel right. I hope it will get better before it is too late, because I do want to use it for the aspects I like (a practically usable LISP). Of course, needless to say, to avoid a flame, these are all my OPINIONS, not a verdict (I don't have the least authority for that) -- 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
