Metadata (including type hints) are attached to symbols by the reader,
so I'm thinking something like:
(def a 1)
(def b 2)
(defn greatest-by
"Return the 'largest' argument, using compare-fn as a comparison function."
[compare-fn & args]
(reduce #(if (pos? (compare-fn %1 %2)) %1 %2) args)
On Nov 4, 2008, at 18:18, Paul Stadig wrote:
> Is it possible to create "generic" macros? I mean macros are basically
> a way to extend the compiler, right? Wouldn't it be useful to be able
> to dispatch a macro based on the type hint of its parameters (or some
> other criteria)?
A macro gets it
I have a kind of random question that may not make any sense, but I'm
going to throw it out there.
Is it possible to create "generic" macros? I mean macros are basically
a way to extend the compiler, right? Wouldn't it be useful to be able
to dispatch a macro based on the type hint of its paramet
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 10:00 AM, Christian Vest Hansen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 3:12 PM, Rich Hickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Nov 4, 9:00 am, "Christian Vest Hansen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>> "Generally" by custom but not required by contract of the Com
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 3:12 PM, Rich Hickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Nov 4, 9:00 am, "Christian Vest Hansen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> "Generally" by custom but not required by contract of the Comparable
>> interface. And those are all Numbers, right?
>>
>> Comparable imposes natural
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 6:45 AM, Rich Hickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Nov 4, 2:56 am, "Christian Vest Hansen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 6:23 AM, Mark H. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > On Nov 3, 6:48 pm, Cosmin Stejerean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
On Nov 4, 9:00 am, "Christian Vest Hansen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 1:45 PM, Rich Hickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 4, 2:56 am, "Christian Vest Hansen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >> On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 6:23 AM, Mark H. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 7:45 AM, Rich Hickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hmm...
>
> Do you want:
>
> (max 1 2.1 4/5)
>
> to work?
>
> If so, you can't base it on Comparable, which generally only supports
> homogenous types.
>
> max, like >, is a numeric operation as it stands, for the above and
>
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 1:45 PM, Rich Hickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Nov 4, 2:56 am, "Christian Vest Hansen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 6:23 AM, Mark H. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > On Nov 3, 6:48 pm, Cosmin Stejerean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>
On Nov 4, 2:56 am, "Christian Vest Hansen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 6:23 AM, Mark H. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 3, 6:48 pm, Cosmin Stejerean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> I think clearly spelling out how objects of a type should be sorted is
> >> the poi
The strings I'm working with are ISO formatted dates, and one of the
reasons many people like to use ISO formatted dates is that they sort
easily. However, the specifics of the situation are really irrelevant.
I just thought it might be seen as incongruent that Clojure has an
elegant collection s
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 6:23 AM, Mark H. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Nov 3, 6:48 pm, Cosmin Stejerean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I think clearly spelling out how objects of a type should be sorted is
>> the point of the Comparable interface.
>
> Ah, yes, this is true, I hadn't realized tha
On Nov 3, 6:48 pm, Cosmin Stejerean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think clearly spelling out how objects of a type should be sorted is
> the point of the Comparable interface.
Ah, yes, this is true, I hadn't realized that String and Date both
implement Comparable. Comparable is supposed to im
On Nov 3, 2008, at 8:35 PM, Mark H. wrote:
>
> On Nov 3, 5:39 pm, "Paul Stadig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Could/Should the max function be modified to work against the
>> Comparable interface instead of expecting its arguments to be
>> numbers?
>>
>> I'm working with a sequence of strings
> The semantics of "max string" are unclear enough that it would be
> better to write out the operation explicitly so that all readers of
> the code know what you mean.
Agreed. For example, the semantics of "max string" are locale-
dependent.
Bill
--~--~-~--~~~---~--
On Nov 3, 2008, at 9:35 PM, Mark H. wrote:
>
> On Nov 3, 5:39 pm, "Paul Stadig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Could/Should the max function be modified to work against the
>> Comparable interface instead of expecting its arguments to be
>> numbers?
>>
>> I'm working with a sequence of strings
On Nov 3, 5:39 pm, "Paul Stadig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Could/Should the max function be modified to work against the
> Comparable interface instead of expecting its arguments to be numbers?
>
> I'm working with a sequence of strings that are dates in the
> "-mm-dd" format, and I want to
Could/Should the max function be modified to work against the
Comparable interface instead of expecting its arguments to be numbers?
I'm working with a sequence of strings that are dates in the
"-mm-dd" format, and I want to find the max. Calling max gives an
exception about not being able to
18 matches
Mail list logo
