Thank you guys, I think "as->" does more or less what I wanted, so my
example could be rewritten to:
(defn csv-line->sql-line [table, line]
(as-> % line
(str % " ")
(str/split % separator)
(map csv-field->sql-field %)
(str/join ", " %)
(str/replace strings-wrapper % "\"")
(str "INSERT INTO ", table, " VALUES(" % ");")))
I guess I can live with 2 more spaces per row, and one more "%" ;-)
As of the conflict with literal form of anonymous function, that's an
interesting question, so I had to check how it works for "as->", and all is
fine, you just have to remember about adding "%" after the literal (which
is how it should work IMHO), so somewhere in the middle of my function
there could be:
(as-> % line
...
(#(str "[" % "]") %)
...)
W dniu niedziela, 16 listopada 2014 00:58:43 UTC+1 użytkownik Henrik
Eneroth napisał:
>
> You can find this functionality in the Swiss Arrows library here:
> https://github.com/rplevy/swiss-arrows
>
> My first thought was that using the % symbol seems cleaner than the <> of
> Swiss Arrows. Thinking about it though, wouldn't overloading the % create
> trouble when you do want to use the literal form of an anonymous function
> within a %> clause?
>
>
> On Saturday, November 15, 2014 2:55:51 PM UTC+1, Krzysiek Herod wrote:
>>
>> Guys, what do you think about new thread macro (I would call it
>> thread-any and represent it as "%>"), that would require you to always
>> specify the position of the argument you want to pass to the function?
>>
>> This code:
>>
>> (defn csv-line->sql-line [table, line]
>> (-> line
>> (str " ")
>> (str/split separator)
>> (#(map csv-field->sql-field %))
>> (#(str/join ", " %))
>> (str/replace strings-wrapper "\"")
>> (#(str "INSERT INTO ", table, " VALUES(" % ");"))))
>>
>> would become:
>>
>> (defn csv-line->sql-line [table, line]
>> (%> line
>> (str % " ")
>> (str/split % separator)
>> (map csv-field->sql-field %)
>> (str/join ", " %)
>> (str/replace strings-wrapper % "\"")
>> (str "INSERT INTO ", table, " VALUES(" % ");")))
>>
>> Reasoning:
>> - there are functions that are "thread-first fiendly", and other that are
>> "thread-last friendly", by using thread-in you don't have to redefine
>> functions only to change the order of the attributes
>> - I find it easier to follow execution chain if the argument is passed
>> explicitely
>>
>> PS. I'm a clojure newbie, still in the process of learning basics. For
>> example I'm not sure how to implement such macro yet, so if you find
>> something obviously wrong, or missing in my suggestion, please let me know.
>> I'll be super happy to read about alternative solutions to achieve similar
>> goal.
>>
>
--
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/d/optout.
