> +1. I can't imagine any use case for looking up a whole [key, value] pair in
> a hash-map.
Actually this is quite useful when you want to do something for each
value and need to know the key as well - for example copy some
key/value pairs to another map
Boris
>
> --
> You received this message
I wonder what is the current state of Clojure @ Android?
Is 1.1 running without modifications?
If someone is running it, could you share your build.xml and/or any tips?
Thank you,
Boris
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 4:24 PM, Alex Coventry wrote:
> My impression from reading Remco van 't Veer's posts
Hello all,
I am playing with the idea of a little library for dependency injection.
The idea is to declare injectable values as metadata-to-function map.
I started with a sketch of what the client code may look like.
Please let me know what you think.
Thank you,
Boris
Dependency declaration cod
> Clojure spells this #_ instead of / and it is indeed
> implemented as a (builtin) reader macro.
Nice, thanks!
:)
>
> --Chouser
>
> >
>
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to thi
One thing that I would like to see implemented seems like a good
candidate for a reader macro...
I find it useful to have a way to comment out an expression by
prefixing it with some symbol.
I.E. if a '/' before an expression is an expression comment, it is
easy to experiment with code:
(foo
> As a second point, I don't like the introduction of assoc!, conj!,
> etc. It just strikes me as another bug to have (oh, right, I need
> assoc! not assoc...).
At least you will get a very clear error, I think it's possible to get
a compile time error if you are dealing with a local.
It will be
> Second, the caching is a barrier to escape analysis. Since rather than
> seeing a freshly-boxed integer 42, which can be optimized away, the
> compiler sees a branch into cache lookup code that returns something
> the compiler cannot know, thus it can't get rid of the lookup.
Rich, please pardon
>> I don't think this is true if you take closures into account.
>
> I hadn't thought about closures. I can see how closures can increase
> the number of primitive holder objects but I don't see that they
> inviolate the approach. It's possible that closures would explode the
> size of the objec
> You might want to do this with a custom classes, not a one-element
> array, because you want to be able to tell if this is your hack or
> just someone is passing a one-element array ...
Crossed in the air :)
Another question - at what point do the objects return to the pool?
It seems to me tha
You are suggesting creating mutable boxed numbers with an object pool.
You might want to do this with a custom classes, not a one-element
array, because you want to be able to tell if this is your hack or
just someone is passing a one-element array ...
> Once the threadlocal cache is of sufficie
Try also visualvm (comes with jdk 1.6 )
https://visualvm.dev.java.net/
Boris
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 5:22 PM, Jonah Benton wrote:
>
> Hi Robert,
>
> I haven't been able to dig into Clojure/JVM/GC details, so I can't
> speak in particular about problems e.g. with the ants application, but
> there
I would attend from time to time, but there is lispnyc group
http://www.lispnyc.org/home.clp
I think it makes more sense to join them - for network effects :)
Boris
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 12:09 PM, Eric Thorsen wrote:
>
> I went to the Bay Area Clojure group meeting last night which was
> great
Makes sense, thanks!
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 11:30 AM, Konrad Hinsen
wrote:
>
> On May 27, 2009, at 17:11, Boris Mizhen - 迷阵 wrote:
>
>> It seems to me that the first would be immune to redefining what
>> closure/core.let means at the point where f is invoked, while the
&g
It seems to me that the first would be immune to redefining what
closure/core.let means at the point where f is invoked, while the
second one would not be.
I was unable to actually redefine closure/core.let - probably because
it is a macro. But some function was used in place of let, than it
coul
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that Clojure
compiler can produce bytecode equivalent to compiled Java code.
I think the right approach would be to figure out how to do this in
Clojure for the cases like this.
Rich?
Boris
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 2:25 PM, tmountain wrot
> Well, under the covers the str function applies the java "toString"
> method to any passed in object and hence the result could for some
> reason be different to the original String object passed in. I think
> this could occur if the object subclasses String, but has a different
> representation
Hello all,
below is the code for an utility macro. It wraps all public static
functions of a class in closure functions and imports them into the
current namespace. Clojure name will be prefix-'method name'.
Example: (import-static \"foo\" java.lang.Math)
And yes, I saw static import from contr
Thanks Jason.
merge-with seems to be made to support a function like this, I wonder
where is the slowdown coming from? Is apply slow?
I named your version seq-to-multimap2. The timing results are below:
user> (def a (reverse (take 10 (iterate (fn [x] (rand-int 100))
1
#'user
ained
by applying key-fn to elements of s and values are
sequences of all elements of s with a given key"
[s key-fn]
(reduce
(fn [m el]
(let [key (key-fn el)]
(assoc m key (conj (m key []) el
{} s))
Boris
On Apr 28, 5:31 pm, Christophe Grand wrote:
> Hi Boris,
ld return a map or a list of lists, that all
> depends on what you want to use it for. Here's a nice demonstration:
>
> user> (seq-to-multimap (range 1 15) #(mod % 5))
> {0 [5 10], 4 [4 9 14], 3 [3 8 13], 2 [2 7 12], 1 [1 6 11]}
>
> -SS
>
> On Apr 28, 4:19 pm
Hello all,
I am starting to learn clojure. I would appreciate comments on the
utility function below.
Coding style, idiomatic Clojure, comment style, efficiency, naming
conventions, indentations (used slime) ... anything I should
improve :)
(defn seq-to-multimap [s key-fn]
"takes a sequence s
Thanks Rich,
> What's correct is what is documented here: http://clojure.org/java_interop
RTFM is still very relevant :)
Boris
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Clojure" group.
To post to this group,
Thanks to all who replied.
To summarize what I learned - Clojure has a special form (. ) to
*call* java functions, but does not have concept of a *value*
corresponding to a java function.
This makes Java functions a second class citizen :)
In addition special forms are expanded in the first pos
,
>
> Am 27.04.2009 um 23:17 schrieb Boris Mizhen:
>
> > ((comp #(Math/abs %) +) -3 -4) => 7
>
> > How can I pass a static java function to another function?
>
> Here you already gave the answer to your question. Wrap it in
> a Clojure fn/#().
>
> > A
e this must be supplied, but
perhaps a macro can be created that results in a function that would
capture this and call the member function appropriately ...
Thank you,
Boris
On Apr 27, 4:26 pm, Boris Mizhen wrote:
> Hello all,
> It seems to me that areduce can not be used with an anonymo
Hello all,
It seems to me that areduce can not be used with an anonymous array.
Consider:
(areduce (.. System getProperties values toArray) i r 0
(some_expression))
It seems to me that there is no way to get i'th element of the array
in (some_expression) other than let'-ing it first.
It would be
26 matches
Mail list logo
