A company I did some work for adopted Ryver for the very reason that it was the
"free" alternative to Slack. While it did most of the job as the company's comm
bus, my experience was that they are a far cry from Slack. The integration
story is weak too. This crowd would not be happy with Ryver,
x27;s not to hard to change by just using seqable? from
contrib. That makes flatten handle anything. After benchmarking it
though, it seems like its muuuch slower; so slow that I got bored of
waiting after 5 minutes. Seems like a punt though :/
On Jul 14, 3:55 pm, Steve Miner wrote:
>
I definitely like this version a little better. If you change the else
of the if to be just (list), it returns the empty list just as core/
flatten does. Mind if I update the ticket with this patch?
On Jul 14, 1:56 pm, miner wrote:
> I think it's worthwhile to have a faster flatten even if it doe
, 11:57 am, Stuart Halloway
wrote:
> Hi Cam,
>
> Please submit the modified version, and, if you want, create a separate
> ticket for "seqable?". I would like to review the latter separately.
>
> Stu
>
>
>
> > Hi again, I modified my-flatten to return t
)))
Might it be worth promoting "seqable?" to core? In that case flatten
would handle pretty much everything you could throw at it like you'd
expect. I don't speak for everyone but when I saw sequential? I
assumed it would have the semantics that seqable? does.
On J
Hi Stuart,
Thanks for checking that out for me! Sorry for not realizing in the
first place.
I of course would be happy to submit a patch. Should I submit that
here or over on the assembla page?
On Jul 13, 9:10 am, Stuart Halloway wrote:
> Hi Cam,
>
> Your tests aren't testing t
Another flatten thread! Sorry..
Hello all, before I realized there was a flatten in the master branch
(and before I looked at contrib) I wrote this pretty standard code:
(defn my-flatten [coll]
(lazy-seq
(when-let [coll (seq coll)]
(let [x (first coll)]
(if (sequential? x)
