On Friday, January 4, 2013 1:35:45 PM UTC-6, puzzler wrote: > On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 9:02 AM, Edward Tsech <edt...@gmail.com<javascript:> > > wrote: > >> Thanks Dave! Seems like different people expect slightly different >> behavior. > > > Are we reading the same thread? When I looked at it, it seemed that there > was actually very broad consensus about the desirability of multiple > bindings in when-let/if-let and about the behavior. Nearly everyone agreed > it was obvious that as soon as you hit a variable that is bound to nil, you > bail out of the expression, short-circuiting further evaluations and > returning nil (for when-let) or the else clause (for if-let). >
Really? I didn't read the thread, but I wouldn't expect that behavior at all. How would you know which bindings to use given the short circuiting? Unless it would bind the short circuited bindings to nil, which also seems weird. I would absolutely want if-let to use (and ..) on my bindings. -- 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
