On 2010 Mar 24, at 2:39 AM, Meikel Brandmeyer wrote:
On Mar 24, 2:22 am, Douglas Philips wrote:
would (let [s1 (first seq1)
s1tail (rest seq1)] ...)
be any better? rest says it calls seq on its argument, and that would
force as well?
Hmmm... So only things like map are able to real
Hi,
On Mar 24, 2:22 am, Douglas Philips wrote:
> would (let [s1 (first seq1)
> s1tail (rest seq1)] ...)
> be any better? rest says it calls seq on its argument, and that would
> force as well?
> Hmmm... So only things like map are able to realize first without
> realizing (first
On 2010 Mar 23, at 9:28 PM, Per Vognsen wrote:
So you can see that scan-filter-zip is lazy in the source sequence but
apparently not the primary input sequence. That was surprising to me
because I see nothing in my code that should have forced that. Then I
remember that some functions like range
For laziness analysis, I typically use code like this:
(defn trace-seq* [name xs]
(for [x xs]
(do (println (str name ": " x))
x)))
(defmacro trace-seq [xs]
`(trace-seq* ~(str xs) ~xs))
If I use it on the code I posted, I get this:
user> (take 3 (scan-filter-zip even? (trace-seq
On 2010 Mar 23, at 4:13 PM, Meikel Brandmeyer wrote:
(let [[s1 & s1tail] seq1
In the above destructuring the first element of s1tail is also
realised.
That is what I mean with "one step ahead". I'm not sure why it is done
like this. I does not seem necessary. But I'm not an expert in
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 01:33:54PM -0400, Douglas Philips wrote:
> >> (let [[s1 & s1tail] seq1
> >
> >Don't use this destructuring in this case, because it forces again the
> >realisation of the seq one step ahead.
>
> If I need s1 anyways, what is the "one step ahead part" that yo
On 2010 Mar 23, at 8:26 AM, Meikel Brandmeyer wrote:
here some notes:
Thanks!
I would use vector instead of list in the example since vector is more
idiomatic in Clojure.
Ok. Just my old lisp roots showing. Still haven't gotten the fingers/
spine
rewired to use [] around defn parameters.
On 2010 Mar 23, at 9:14 AM, Per Vognsen wrote:
Remember the one-liner I gave you last time?
Yup. It was the 'hard coded + 0' parts that had been ruminating in the
back of my mind as being something that could be abstracted out. :)
Since the one you just posted didn't have all the features
Remember the one-liner I gave you last time?
(defn indexed-pred [pred coll]
(map #(if (pred %1) [%2 %1] [%1]) coll (reductions + 0 (map #(if
(pred %) 1 0) coll
Here's how little it has to change:
(defn funkymonkey [pred src coll]
(map #(if (pred %1) [(first %2) %1] [%1]) coll (reductions
Hi,
here some notes:
On Mar 23, 12:53 pm, Douglas Philips wrote:
> (semi-map vowel? list \"Hellow Word\" (iterate inc 1))
> -> (\\H (\\e 1) \\l \\l (\\o 2) \\w \\space \\W (\\o 3) \\r \\d)"
I would use vector instead of list in the example since vector is more
idiomatic in Clojure.
Last week, Per Vognsen answered my first version of this question, how
can I number just the vowels in a string: http://groups.google.com/group/clojure/msg/22186113b36041f1?hl=en
But that got me thinking that "numbering" was just an instance of
consuming from the (iterate inc 0) sequence.
As
11 matches
Mail list logo
