Not even that: -> is not a function composition operator at all, but a
form-rewriting macro. You can perfectly well write (-> [x xs] (for (inc
x))) to get (for [x xs] (inc x)), and that is not composing any functions.
The two things are entirely separate.
On Wednesday, April 3, 2013 12:45:55 PM
Although I've announced vim-redl in the past, now you can reap the benefits
of all of its features without leaving fireplace behind! Just go to
https://github.com/dgrnbrg/vim-redl for installation instructions, and
you'll end up with advanced fuzzy omnicompletion and a full-fledged repl
(accessible
Now it's clear.
Thank you
Plínio
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Marko Topolnik wrote:
> I guess you mean the monadic bind operation, but -> is not it. The only
> conceptual connection between *bind* and -> is that they are both some
> kind of function composition operators.
>
> -marko
>
>
> O
I guess you mean the monadic bind operation, but -> is not it. The only
conceptual connection between *bind* and -> is that they are both some kind
of function composition operators.
-marko
On Wednesday, April 3, 2013 8:21:43 PM UTC+2, Plinio Balduino wrote:
>
> Hi there
>
> Is it correct to sa
Hi there
Is it correct to say that -> operator is a kind of monad in Clojure?
Thank you in advance.
Plínio Balduino
--
--
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 fr
Just because there does not appear to be any logic behind a certain
decision does not mean it's a bug.
That being said, I've always thought of the compiler workflow in Lisp as
being (conceptually): Reader / Data -> Macro Expander -> Compiler.
Naturally, macros must be expanded in the macro ex
Destructure the map entry.
(for [[k vs] some-map, v vs] v) or whatever.
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Jim - FooBar(); wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I 've recently come across this idiom (instead of nested reduces - from
> Christophe's blog post of course!)
>
> (reduce f init (for [x xs, y x, z y] z)) ;;
Hi all,
I 've recently come across this idiom (instead of nested reduces - from
Christophe's blog post of course!)
(reducef init (for[x xs, y x, z y] z)) ;;it took me a while to realise
how cool this is :)
I'm trying to do the same for reduce-kv (for nested maps) but doesn't quite
On 3 April 2013 17:53, Gary Verhaegen wrote:
> Do you really need ratios ?
>
> Intuitively, the management of ratios should be much more of a problem
> than the use of BigInts, performance-wise. You did not provide many
> details on the calculations you are trying to do, but I would advise
> you t
Is there a reason for not using primitive doubles? You won't get perfect
precision but you won't get slow, high-precision math or tons of objects
created and garbage collected either.
(* (/ 1.0 255.0) 255.0)
1.0
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Cl
OT:
@Peter Mancini
I would like to invite you, like* everybody else who is doing a lot of math
and especially matrix*, to check out core.matrix (
https://github.com/mikera/matrix-api) and leave as many feedback as
possible about everything, from design to implementation of library to
performanc
Those are good answers and it is acceptable, but what ends up happening is
that it creates objects. I just used a profiler and that operation inside
of my code for a typical run is executed 1,500 million times. It makes up
the lions share of self-time measurements. Each object needs construction
On Tuesday, April 2, 2013 1:09:25 PM UTC-6, larry google groups wrote:
>
>
> If Clojure is suppose to emphasize immutability, why can I do this:
>
> kiosks-clojure.core=> (let [
> #_=> mega (+ 1 1)
> #_=> mega (+ 1 mega)
> #_=> mega (+ 1 mega)
>
I am curious, what data store are you interacting with?
On Wednesday, April 3, 2013 2:01:33 PM UTC+2, Ryan wrote:
>
> Most SQL Database support array types natively
>
>
> If you are using MySQL unfortunately there isn't and the OP (including
> myself) probably needs this because his RDBMS does n
>
> Most SQL Database support array types natively
If you are using MySQL unfortunately there isn't and the OP (including
myself) probably needs this because his RDBMS does not support the array
type.
On Wednesday, April 3, 2013 2:47:45 PM UTC+3, Thomas Heller wrote:
>
> My Question would be
My Question would be: why are you trying to do this? You mentioned you are
working with a database, I assume that means SQL (as almost all NoSQL
Databases support some kind of JSON which doesnt require your
"workarround"). Most SQL Database support array types natively, while
support might be a
16 matches
Mail list logo
