On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 4:40 AM, juan.facorro <juan.faco...@gmail.com> wrote: > In the short time I've been active in the list, I've seen this topic come up > a couple of times, and they both have come up really close to each other > also, there's been one in December and another in January :P > > What I understand from those discussions is that there's no single > expectation from the user perspective on which logical operator (if any) > should be applied to the results of each binding, so any implementation > that's chosen would surprise someone.
There's also no need for it to be in the core. when-let* (with your preferred semantics) can be defined in terms of existing constructs. It doesn't need to be primitive the way fn* is. -- Ben Wolfson "Human kind has used its intelligence to vary the flavour of drinks, which may be sweet, aromatic, fermented or spirit-based. ... Family and social life also offer numerous other occasions to consume drinks for pleasure." [Larousse, "Drink" entry] -- -- 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.
