On 15/10/13 18:02, Sean Corfield wrote:
One construct using let that I see in my code quite a bit that I
haven't figured out a cleaner way to express:
(let [x (some-expression)]
(if (p x)
(f x)
(g x)))
wasn't cond-> designed exactly for that?
(let [x (some-expression)]
(cond-> x
(p x) f
((comlpement p) x) g)))
Jim
--
--
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.
