2009/5/16 Sean Devlin :
>
> I'm sorry, it's an Americanism. By "Dog People", I meant someone that
> prefers a dog as a pet, not a cat. It was meant as a joke.
OK, I know understand the joke and the play on words :-$
>
> You're right, I should be more considerate of the international
> audience
>Yes, the general consensus is that basic math needs to be as fast as
>possible, even at the expense of some flexibility.
It's worth noting here that one can also use binding to override other
than arithmetic core functions;
(defn ustr [s] (binding [clojure.core/str
(fn [x] (.toUpperCase x))]
So I've built a file/namespace with several functions. There are
several globals defined at the top of the file (for example,
*gravity*) which many of the functions refer to. I made them globals
precisely because it would have been a pain to thread them through
every single function that uses th
bradford cross writes:
> First item of business - there are no operators, operators are functions.
>
> I think the Clojure way to do this is via multimethods:
> http://clojure.org/multimethods
>
> I might just be naive, but it seems like more of core would need to be
> implemented as multimeth
One way to accomplish this is via :refer-clojure in ns.
Usage is like:
(ns test
(:refer-clojure :exclude [+]))
This would allow you to, for example, dispatch the implementation
based on the type of the first argument via multimethods (as Michel S.
noted, at a performance penalty). The origina
First item of business - there are no operators, operators are functions.
I think the Clojure way to do this is via multimethods:
http://clojure.org/multimethods
I might just be naive, but it seems like more of core would need to be
implemented as multimethods in order to do this.
Has this come
On May 16, 2009, at 8:23 PM, Michel S. wrote:
That's a bit of a red herring, though? You can always rewrite the code
to use normal (as opposed to tail) recursion, if you don't want to use
reverse. Depending on how large the resulting list is, it's a space-
vs-
time tradeoff: the normal recurs
On May 15, 4:41 pm, "Stephen C. Gilardi" wrote:
>
> Another nice benefit of Clojure's efficient vectors over lists is that
> functions that produce a collection of results can produce and store
> them in order without needing to "reverse" the result just before
> returning. Reversing is a
On May 16, 4:32 pm, Saptarshi wrote:
> Hello,
> I am totally new to Clojure and have dabbled in Scala. In Scala, it is
> possible to override the + operator ,e.g a class A can overide +.
> In Clojure, I would have a struct and not a class. Can I still
> override the + operator in Clojure?
>
In
Hello,
I am totally new to Clojure and have dabbled in Scala. In Scala, it is
possible to override the + operator ,e.g a class A can overide +.
In Clojure, I would have a struct and not a class. Can I still
override the + operator in Clojure?
Regards
Saptarshi
--~--~-~--~~---
Ah yes, good point! I'll change that code to dereference inside the
transaction (you're totally right, that's the whole point of
transactions!) and not use "ref" as a local binding. Thanks for the
tips!
Sorry, I should have included a run script or something, or at least
instructions on using JOG
In my own experimentation, I was really surprised to find that
traversal over vectors seemed to be faster than lists, so I tend to
use vectors rather than lists for any "fixed collection" that I'm
basically just traversing once I've built. Haven't benchmarked
recently, though, so this could have
Hi,
Am 16.05.2009 um 22:42 schrieb Sean Devlin:
I was making a joke about housecats.
Argh. Sorry. I always pronounce "cat" in german
rather than english. Some strange tick of mine.
So I didn't get the play of words.
Sincerely
Meikel
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
I was making a joke about housecats.
Maybe I should file a bug report saying cat should default to being
lazy :)
Again, sorry for the confusion.
On May 16, 4:34 pm, Meikel Brandmeyer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Am 16.05.2009 um 21:58 schrieb Sean Devlin:
>
> > Lazy cat is redundant.
>
> concat != lazy-ca
Hi,
Am 16.05.2009 um 21:58 schrieb Sean Devlin:
Lazy cat is redundant.
concat != lazy-cat. lazy-cat is obviously not redundant.
Sincerely
Meikel
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
I'm sorry, it's an Americanism. By "Dog People", I meant someone that
prefers a dog as a pet, not a cat. It was meant as a joke.
You're right, I should be more considerate of the international
audience, and careful to make my tone more clear. Thank you for
speaking up.
Sean
On May 16, 4:13 p
Sounds good. Unless there are other suggestions, can someone make the
minor changes and commit it to contrib?
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to cloj
2009/5/16 Sean Devlin :
>
> Clearly you are all dog people.
Hello,
What means calling others "dog people" exactly ?
Not being a native english person, I'm unsure whether the above is an
insult, is ironic, or something else ?
Anyway, the above sentence, without any smiley of some sort to explai
Clearly you are all dog people. Lazy cat is redundant.
On May 16, 3:55 pm, Meikel Brandmeyer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Am 16.05.2009 um 21:48 schrieb George Jahad:
>
> > I can't come up with a reason to use lazy-cat over concat. Is it
> > just around for backwards compatibility, or am I missing someth
Hi,
Am 16.05.2009 um 21:48 schrieb George Jahad:
I can't come up with a reason to use lazy-cat over concat. Is it
just around for backwards compatibility, or am I missing something?
(defmacro lazy-cat
[& colls]
`(concat ~@(map #(list `lazy-seq %) colls)))
There is a difference! Consider
I can't come up with a reason to use lazy-cat over concat. Is it
just around for backwards compatibility, or am I missing something?
(defmacro lazy-cat
[& colls]
`(concat ~@(map #(list `lazy-seq %) colls)))
Thanks,
George
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received
Hi again,
I think I found the root cause of my problem.
Since clojure compiles namespaces as they are encountered it
depends on when c.c.def is compiled. If it's compiled first, it's
anonymous function is created in clojure.core. Hence you get
the clojure/core$clojure_contrib_def_... .class file
Yes Anand, I'm worried about that. What I think the solution should
be is to allow mutability in the implementation of algorithms in the
java back end for the reasons you mentioned, but a clean immutable
interface on the clojure side. When users are faced with serious
memory limitations, though,
Remember clojure, like other lisps, is homoiconic: the program code
itself is clojure data. Lists are very common in clojure, since a list
is is used in the function invocation syntax, e.g. (inc 0).
Otherwise, used as a general purpose lists have the same benefits of
linked lists over arrays that
Hi,
Am 16.05.2009 um 06:32 schrieb Paul Mooser:
I've been using clojure for a while at this point, and the approach
I've settled on launches clojure using -cp clojure.jar, and then my
user.clj file contains code that loads a bunch of thing into my
classpath.
After updating to r1369, which mad
Hi,
I've recently been trying to work with Emacs and Slime on Windows using
Clojure Box. Having never used emacs at all it is tough going. I had a
question or two regarding best practices.
The first is regarding classpaths. I've managed to figure out how to setup
my classpath and library path (s
26 matches
Mail list logo
