On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 10:48 AM, Sean Corfield <seancorfi...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 10:19 AM, Jim - FooBar(); <jimpil1...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > wasn't cond-> designed exactly for that? > > > > (let [x (some-expression)] > > (cond-> x > > (p x) f > > ((comlpement p) x) g))) > > That's uglier than the if :) > Also less efficient, since it may require evaluating (p x) twice. If it were me, I'd use something like this: (defn either "Return a function that takes one argument, x, and returns (f x) if (p x) is truthy and (g x) otherwise." [p f g] (fn [x] (if (p x) (f x) (g x)))) -- 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.
