Can a seq be thought of as a kind of a list of pointers to the original vector elements then? If so, then does an operation on a vector, (e.g. reverse), cause clojure to internally generate a seq of pointers to the original vector elements? In other words seqs seem to provide a layer of indirection to avoid the need to copy elements of the original collection?
On Saturday, 30 November 2013 21:31:34 UTC, Jim foo.bar wrote: > > On Sat, 30 Nov 2013 13:15:33 -0800 (PST) > Andy Smith <the4th...@googlemail.com <javascript:>> wrote: > > > but > > my question is really about the more general case of any function > > that manipulates a vector e.g. the following also returns a list > > rather than a vector as desired, > > In Clojure you rarely have to worry about types. All the > data-structures fall under a common set of abstractions and in > particular the ISeq interface. Strictly speaking map returns a seq not > a list. In fact a lazy seq...this is by design so further operations > can be applied lazily later...if you use eager operations like mapv > exclusively you lose the ability to aggregate operations without cost. > hope that clarifies it... > > > 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.
