Here is "another language" elisp: Anybody who use Emacs can do this:
(subseq (make-vector 5 10) 2 4) => [10 10] (subseq '(10 10 10 10 10) 2 4) => (10 10) As simple as that. Is that even worth the debate? :-) On Thursday, June 28, 2012 11:30:25 AM UTC-4, Warren Lynn wrote: > > Some of my thoughts: > > 1. The argument that other languages do not have a similar thing is not > valid. If that is valid, we don't need Clojure in the first place. > > 2. The argument that other people did not raise the issue before and not > enough people support it so this is a non-issue is also not valid. If that > is valid, the vote-based committee designed language will be the best, and > also the most popular language will be the best. Of course, I do need > people's support so the change will happen, but that is different from the > issue itself. > > 3. Simplicity is defined as "constant time" operation is really weird > here to me. Simplicity in my view is a clear abstraction so conceptually > things behavior consistently, regardless the time. The user himself knows > that counting a sequence will take longer than vector, so it is his choice > to use vector of sequence. But counting is still counting, and he does not > need to have to choose between"countvec" or "countseq". That is what > abstraction is about. > > 4. Back to my original need. I need to use vector a lot because I deal > with large data set for numeric processing. When I extract a segment from > the vector, I still want it to be a vector. Of course it is doable even now > (with "vec" you can convert a sequence back to vector). But when I am > writing some basic routines, I don't want to limit them to vector as they > may be useful for sequence too. Still, I can write separate versions or > with a lot of conditions as someone else did. But are we trying to achieve > something better than doable here? > > 5. The solution is really simple. Add one or two functions as I suggested > before. I don't see any downside of 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
