Re: & args destructuring in functions?

2013-03-06 Thread Achint Sandhu
I personally think the first (current) approach is better since it ensures that the abstraction is not leaky from a caller's perspective, e,g. as a user I want to be able to type (+ 1 2 3 4 5) instead of (+ 1 2 [3 4 5]). The fact that the last 3 arguments end up as a collection inside the imple

Re: Understanding map laziness in relation to vectors

2013-03-06 Thread Achint Sandhu
Thank you Dave. Very much appreciated. Cheers, Achint -- -- 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 firs

Understanding map laziness in relation to vectors

2013-03-06 Thread Achint Sandhu
Hi, In the sample code below, I'd like to rerun the first value that returns a non-nil result upon the application of a function (foo in the code sample below). In the real use case , the computation of the function is expensive, so I'd only like to run foo until I find the first non-nil value.