The more I watch this conversation, the more I like some-> and cond->. What was the motivation for changing let-> to as-> ? let-> made a lot of sense as a name to me.
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 6:48 AM, Rich Hickey <richhic...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'll argue that if 'e' in conde is enough to imply 'each' then '->' in > cond-> is enough to imply it keeps threading. > > I think many people have ideas about -> operators born of some of these > libraries that supply a wealth of 'things you can use in ->'. Most of > their operators have '->' in their names, but don't fundamentally thread - > e.g. they are terminators or one shots like if-> (or ->if). > > A op-> operator, IMO, should take an open set of expressions and thread > the return values through them in some way. Otherwise it shouldn't be an > op->. > > When one reads -> as 'thread' vs 'for use in threading', things might > become clearer. > > > On Dec 1, 2012, at 9:31 AM, Steve Miner wrote: > > > gate-> would work. Like guard-> it doesn't have any connotations in the > Clojure world, but it's learnable. I'll add one more: qual-> ... short for > "qualified threading macro". Each clause is qualified by a test condition. > > > > Of course, there's always conde-> to borrow from miniKanren and > core.logic. The "e" stands for "every" because multiple clauses can > succeed as opposed to the short-circuiting cond. > > > > > > On Nov 30, 2012, at 2:49 PM, Rich Hickey <richhic...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> > >> On Nov 30, 2012, at 1:49 PM, Steve Miner wrote: > >> > >>> I propose guard-> to avoid the cond-> confusion. > >>> > >> > >> Yeah, that came up. Guards in other langs are short circuiting, just > like cond. > >> > >> Another in that camp was gate-> > > > > -- > > 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 > -- 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
