On Feb 12, 2014, at 5:46 AM, Vincent <vhenneb...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Friday, February 7, 2014 2:23:33 AM UTC, Sean Corfield wrote: > On Feb 6, 2014, at 12:58 PM, Stuart Sierra <the.stua...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I think (reduce + (range N)) is commonly used in *examples*, not necessarily >> in real applications. > I'd have to agree: I don't see anything like that in our 20kloc at World > Singles. I see a handful of (reduce + data) for arbitrary series of data > values. > On a slightly different topic: why reduce and not apply?
Stuart addressed the performance (non-)issue but I think the intent of (reduce + data) is much clearer than (apply + data). To me, apply says "I have arbitrary arguments that I've constructed programmatically and now I want to call a function with those arguments" whereas reduce says "I have a collection and want to apply this function cumulatively across that collection". Sean Corfield -- (904) 302-SEAN An Architect's View -- http://corfield.org/ "Perfection is the enemy of the good." -- Gustave Flaubert, French realist novelist (1821-1880)
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
