So, I basically thought that this is what's happening in your case also
(but it's not!):
=> (map println '(1 2 3))
(1
2
nil 3
nil nil)
=> (= '(nil nil nil) (map println '(1 2 3)))
1
2
3
true
;so your case is different due to pr-str and pr
=> (def k (pr-str (for [x (range 5)]
(do (pr x)
x))))
#'user/k
=> k
"(012340 1 2 3 4)"
=> (= "(012340 1 2 3 4)" k)
true
Sorry for the noise, indeed it seems like pr-str is just redirecting *out*
until done using with-out-str.
This is certainly much more severe that I thought initially.
=> (def k (pr-str (for [x (range 5)]
(do (pr x)
(println "nothing")
x))))
#'user/k
=> k
"(0nothing\r\n1nothing\r\n2nothing\r\n3nothing\r\n4nothing\r\n0 1 2 3 4)"
=> (= "(0nothing\r\n1nothing\r\n2nothing\r\n3nothing\r\n4nothing\r\n0 1 2 3
4)" k)
true
This is so bad :)
On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 8:26 PM, AtKaaZ <atk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 8:25 PM, AtKaaZ <atk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 8:22 PM, AtKaaZ <atk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> do you mean that, when the string it outputted like:
>>> => (println k)
>>>
>>> (012340 1 2 3 4)
>>> nil
>>> => (prn k)
>>>
>>> "(012340 1 2 3 4)"
>>> nil
>>>
>>> the side effects of evaluating k being mixed into the output could
>>> affect you (other than just visually in the repl) ? if ie. you redirect
>>> *out* to some file with the purpose of saving and later restoring that?
>>>
>>> Well, I don't actually like this myself (ever since I've encountered the
>>> map println example I've given) but I ignored it because people didn't seem
>>> to find it a big deal and nothing I could do about it + it only affected me
>>> in viewing REPL output.
>>>
>>>
>>> But I'm not sure if it is clear to you what is happening (perhaps I
>>> misunderstand what you're saying), it's only when showing the value of the
>>> string (k in this case) that the text shown is mixed, but the value of k is
>>> accurate, as seen below:
>>>
>>> On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 7:30 PM, Conrad <drc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I tested this in the latest 1.5.0-RC6:
>>>>
>>>> => (def k (pr-str (for [x (range 5)]
>>>> (do (pr x)
>>>> x))))
>>>> #'user/k
>>>> => k
>>>> "(012340 1 2 3 4)"
>>>>
>>> => (= "[0 1 2 3 4]" k)
>>> true
>>>
>> OOps, I pasted the wrong one here (from the "vec" form)
>> But looks like I was wrong, and you were correct!!
>>
>> => (def k (pr-str (for [x (range 5)]
>> (do ;(pr x)
>> x))))
>> #'user/k
>> => k
>> "(0 1 2 3 4)"
>> => (= "(0 1 2 3 4)" k)
>> true
>>
>> => (def k (pr-str (for [x (range 5)]
>> (do (pr x)
>> x))))
>> #'user/k
>> => (= "(0 1 2 3 4)" k)
>> false
>>
> => (= "(012340 1 2 3 4)" k)
> true
>
> so it's not exactly like the example that I've given... I'll have to
> investigate more
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 8:03 PM, Conrad <drc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I agree when you print to stdout you'd expect lazily evaluated output
>>>> to be mangled in.
>>>>
>>>> However, it would seem more natural to me that if you print something
>>>> to a string it is counter intuitive for incidental writes to stdout to be
>>>> redirected to the string, as well- There is also nothing in the
>>>> documentation that suggests this would happen.
>>>>
>>>> Also, it would be technically relatively easy to change this.
>>>>
>>>> On Saturday, February 9, 2013 12:46:08 PM UTC-6, AtKaaZ wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> here's a simpler example:
>>>>> => (map println '(1 2 3))
>>>>> (1
>>>>> 2
>>>>> nil 3
>>>>> nil nil)
>>>>> => (dorun (map println '(1 2 3)))
>>>>> 1
>>>>> 2
>>>>> 3
>>>>> nil
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 7:44 PM, AtKaaZ <atk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> actually replacing vec with dorun or doall, would've been a better
>>>>>> example :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 7:42 PM, AtKaaZ <atk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think it's an illusion from being lazy ?
>>>>>>> => (def k (pr-str (vec (for [x (range 5)]
>>>>>>> ** (do (pr x)
>>>>>>> ** x)))))
>>>>>>> 01234
>>>>>>> #'datest1.ret/k
>>>>>>> => k
>>>>>>> "[0 1 2 3 4]"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 7:30 PM, Conrad <drc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I tested this in the latest 1.5.0-RC6:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> => (def k (pr-str (for [x (range 5)]
>>>>>>>> (do (pr x)
>>>>>>>> x))))
>>>>>>>> #'user/k
>>>>>>>> => k
>>>>>>>> "(012340 1 2 3 4)"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This seems wrong to me... I can see what would be needed to fix it
>>>>>>>> in clojure/core.clj, but it would require creating several additional
>>>>>>>> private functions. Does anyone know if this behavior is intentional?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>>>>>> Groups "Clojure" group.
>>>>>>>> To post to this group, send email to clo...@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+u...@**googlegroups.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>>>>>>> http://groups.google.com/**group/clojure?hl=en<http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en>
>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>>>>>> Groups "Clojure" group.
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
>>>>>>>> send an email to clojure+u...@**googlegroups.com.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> For more options, visit
>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/**groups/opt_out<https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out>
>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Please correct me if I'm wrong or incomplete,
>>>>>>> even if you think I'll subconsciously hate it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Please correct me if I'm wrong or incomplete,
>>>>>> even if you think I'll subconsciously hate it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Please correct me if I'm wrong or incomplete,
>>>>> even if you think I'll subconsciously hate it.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>> --
>>>> 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 unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>>> an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Please correct me if I'm wrong or incomplete,
>>> even if you think I'll subconsciously hate it.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Please correct me if I'm wrong or incomplete,
>> even if you think I'll subconsciously hate it.
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Please correct me if I'm wrong or incomplete,
> even if you think I'll subconsciously hate it.
>
>
--
Please correct me if I'm wrong or incomplete,
even if you think I'll subconsciously hate it.
--
--
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 unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
