Re: SCA FAQ link at clojure.org/contributing....

Hi, Am 21.12.2010 um 22:00 schrieb Laurent PETIT: > Now yes, and no, no more chances :-( Seems the link is fixed? http://oss.oracle.com/oca-faq.pdf Sincerely Meikel -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email

Re: SCA FAQ link at clojure.org/contributing....

39 pm, Mike Meyer wrote: > The link to the SCA FAQ on the page at clojure.org/contributing now > returns a document not found page. Given that the Clojure CA is based > on the Sun Contributor Agreement and what Oracle has since done with > NotQuiteSoOpenSolaris, this would seem to be an i

Re: SCA FAQ link at clojure.org/contributing....

2010/12/21 Ken Wesson > On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 3:43 PM, Laurent PETIT > wrote: > > Indeed, this has been a problem for me too. I also tried to get it via > the > > backdoors, e.g. via the Open JDK, Netbeans, etc., websites, but they did > > respect the "DRY" principle correctly, and all I found

Re: SCA FAQ link at clojure.org/contributing....

On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 3:43 PM, Laurent PETIT wrote: > Indeed, this has been a problem for me too. I also tried to get it via the > backdoors, e.g. via the Open JDK, Netbeans, etc., websites, but they did > respect the "DRY" principle correctly, and all I found was just links to the > missing pag

Re: SCA FAQ link at clojure.org/contributing....

Indeed, this has been a problem for me too. I also tried to get it via the backdoors, e.g. via the Open JDK, Netbeans, etc., websites, but they did respect the "DRY" principle correctly, and all I found was just links to the missing page :-/ 2010/12/21 Mike Meyer > The link t

SCA FAQ link at clojure.org/contributing....

The link to the SCA FAQ on the page at clojure.org/contributing now returns a document not found page. Given that the Clojure CA is based on the Sun Contributor Agreement and what Oracle has since done with NotQuiteSoOpenSolaris, this would seem to be an important document to have available

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

On 4/29/2010 6:49 PM, Michael Gardner wrote: +1. I can't imagine any use case for looking up a whole [key, value] pair in a hash-map. Agreed. The whole point of a map is to provide key-based lookup. Iterating over all (key, value) pairs in the map makes sense, not so much looking for one in pa

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

If "contains?" is a sensible name for that function, then surely "seq-contains?" cannot be a sensible name for a function which checks a totally different sort of "containment"? Also, if it is possible to view "seq-contains?" as a sensible enough name for a core library function with sequential se

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

On Apr 30, 2010, at 14:33 , Rich Hickey wrote: > > 'contains?' and 'get' abstract over fast lookup. They are polymorphic on the > collection type and on the nature of the looked-up thing. For maps the > looked-up thing is a key, for sets: a value, for vectors, strings and arrays: > an index.

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

Clojure embraces this "laziness": user=> (get #{:foo :bar} :foo) :foo 'get uses a "key" to return a "value". A vector is not a map is not a set, but all of them can have their values accessed in constant-time using a "key". On Apr 30, 3:14 pm, "Steven E. Harris" wrote: > Phil Hagelberg write

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

Phil Hagelberg writes: > Actually I do consider sets to have keys, since internally they are > implemented using maps, so the exact same semantics apply for their > lookup. They're just maps where the key and value are the same thing: But that implementation is one of convenience, of possibly ad

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

On Apr 29, 3:21 am, ataggart wrote: > Functions named contains-key? and contains-val? would make a lot more > sense to me than the current contains? and new seq-contains?. Amen. Even independent of any performance expectations. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Go

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

On Apr 30, 2010, at 6:33 AM, Rich Hickey wrote: > Would contains-val? be fast for sets? As a user of sets, I consider them > collections of values, and I absolutely would reach for contains-val? in any > library that had it, for use with sets. If so, and I used contains-val?, and > I moved cod

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

s A so we can all stop wasting time and energy on this unnecessary function. An unnecessary function that you just a few paragraphs prior acknowledged that people need? Yes, let's do stop "wasting time and energy". Stuart says that this is FAQ #5, so let's just le

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

On Apr 30, 4:33 am, Rich Hickey wrote: > People don't consider sets, vectors, arrays or strings to have 'keys'.   > But, like maps, they all support fast lookup of some sort. But of course we do. I point to the doc for contains? and get: Usage: (contains? coll key) Returns true if key is prese

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 5:18 AM, Laurent PETIT wrote: > While it sounds soo evident now that you say that explicitly ( the > contains? / get pair ), it may be good to reflect that in the docs of > the functions rather than just keep this knowledge here ? Agreed. This explanation of the relations

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 4:33 AM, Rich Hickey wrote: > On Apr 29, 2010, at 4:21 AM, ataggart wrote: >> Functions named contains-key? and contains-val? would make a lot more >> sense to me than the current contains? and new seq-contains?.  Anyone >> looking at contains-val? should expect it to be O(

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

Hi, On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 7:48 AM, Meikel Brandmeyer wrote: > > On 29 Apr., 01:38, Mark Engelberg wrote: > > > 1. Don't include seq-contains? The behavior you want can usually be > > achieved by using (some #{item} coll). Disadvantage - if you're > > testing to see if the collection contains

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

On Apr 29, 2010, at 2:19 PM, MarkSwanson wrote: > On Apr 29, 4:21 am, ataggart wrote: >> I know it won't matter, but for posterity if nothing else... >> >> Functions named contains-key? and contains-val? would make a lot more >> sense to me than the current contains? and new seq-contains?. Any

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

2010/4/30 Rich Hickey : > > On Apr 29, 2010, at 4:21 AM, ataggart wrote: > >> I know it won't matter, but for posterity if nothing else... >> >> Functions named contains-key? and contains-val? would make a lot more >> sense to me than the current contains? and new seq-contains?.  Anyone >> looking

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

On Apr 29, 2010, at 4:21 AM, ataggart wrote: I know it won't matter, but for posterity if nothing else... Functions named contains-key? and contains-val? would make a lot more sense to me than the current contains? and new seq-contains?. Anyone looking at contains-val? should expect it to be

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

Iterating through the pairs is useful. Asking if a given [k, v] is included is not - you can just ask if (= (assoc k) v) instead. It'd be nice if (contains-val) returned the key(s) as its true result, but probably not useful enough to warrant the complexity of dealing with false keys, explicit tr

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

> +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

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

On Apr 29, 4:21 am, ataggart wrote: > I know it won't matter, but for posterity if nothing else... > > Functions named contains-key? and contains-val? would make a lot more > sense to me than the current contains? and new seq-contains?.  Anyone > looking at contains-val? should expect it to be O

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

On Apr 29, 2010, at 3:21 AM, ataggart wrote: > I know it won't matter, but for posterity if nothing else... > > Functions named contains-key? and contains-val? would make a lot more > sense to me than the current contains? and new seq-contains?. Anyone > looking at contains-val? should expect it

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

(send contains-val? inc) On Apr 29, 9:06 am, Douglas Philips wrote: > On 2010 Apr 29, at 4:21 AM, ataggart wrote: > > > Functions named contains-key? and contains-val? would make a lot more > > sense to me than the current contains? and new seq-contains?.  Anyone > > looking at contains-val? shou

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

On Apr 29, 2:17 am, Mark Engelberg wrote: > On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 10:49 PM, Douglas Philips wrote: > > What is the purpose, goal, design-rationale of not making seq-contains? fast > > on maps or sets? > > I think Rich's point is that if seq-contains? is sometimes fast and > sometimes slow, th

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

On 2010 Apr 29, at 7:52 AM, Laurent PETIT wrote: 2010/4/29 Mark J. Reed : I like this proposal. I'd make contains? an alias for contains-key? with a deprecation warning, and just forget about seq-contains? in favor of contains-val? This makes a lot of sense to me. (and have, as suggested by a

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

On 2010 Apr 29, at 4:21 AM, ataggart wrote: Functions named contains-key? and contains-val? would make a lot more sense to me than the current contains? and new seq-contains?. Anyone looking at contains-val? should expect it to be O(n). The only effective difference would be that the test value

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

On 2010 Apr 29, at 2:17 AM, Mark Engelberg wrote: On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 10:49 PM, Douglas Philips wrote: What is the purpose, goal, design-rationale of not making seq- contains? fast on maps or sets? I think Rich's point is that if seq-contains? is sometimes fast and sometimes slow, then it

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

Thinking about this one. I like this proposal. I'd make contains? an alias for contains-key? with a deprecation warning, and just forget about seq-contains? in favor of contains-val? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

2010/4/29 Mark J. Reed : > I like this proposal.  I'd make contains? an alias for contains-key? > with a deprecation warning, and just forget about seq-contains? in > favor of contains-val? This makes a lot of sense to me. (and have, as suggested by ataggart, contains-key? complain if passed a seq

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

I like this proposal. I'd make contains? an alias for contains-key? with a deprecation warning, and just forget about seq-contains? in favor of contains-val? On Thursday, April 29, 2010, ataggart wrote: > I know it won't matter, but for posterity if nothing else... > > Functions named contains-k

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

On Apr 29, 2010, at 1:57 AM, Meikel Brandmeyer wrote: Hi, On 29 Apr., 01:43, Stuart Halloway wrote: I'll wait for Rich to maybe chime in on seq-contains?. Other than seq- contains? are people liking the new fns? Anybody having issues we didn't anticipate? I was a little bit surprised ab

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

I know it won't matter, but for posterity if nothing else... Functions named contains-key? and contains-val? would make a lot more sense to me than the current contains? and new seq-contains?. Anyone looking at contains-val? should expect it to be O(n). The only effective difference would be tha

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 10:49 PM, Douglas Philips wrote: > What is the purpose, goal, design-rationale of not making seq-contains? fast > on maps or sets? I think Rich's point is that if seq-contains? is sometimes fast and sometimes slow, then it makes it harder to reason about a program that use

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

Hi, On 29 Apr., 01:43, Stuart Halloway wrote: > I'll wait for Rich to maybe chime in on seq-contains?. Other than seq- > contains? are people liking the new fns? Anybody having issues we   > didn't anticipate? I was a little bit surprised about map-indexed and keep-indexed. Why specialised func

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

On 2010 Apr 28, at 11:04 PM, Rich Hickey wrote: It is an important aspect of Clojure that, in general, performance guarantees are part of the semantics of functions. In particular, functions are not supported on data structures where they are not performant. Understood. That isn't the poin

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

Hi, On 29 Apr., 01:38, Mark Engelberg wrote: > 1.  Don't include seq-contains?  The behavior you want can usually be > achieved by using (some #{item} coll).  Disadvantage - if you're > testing to see if the collection contains nil, that won't work. Not entirely correct. (some #(= % item) coll)

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

On 2010 Apr 28, at 7:38 PM, Mark Engelberg wrote: But I think you're not fully appreciating the complexity of the situation. This is not just about performance, but a question of two different possible semantics for "contains?", which is why it can't *only* be addressed with a protocol. ...

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

On Apr 28, 7:17 pm, Douglas Philips wrote: > On 2010 Apr 28, at 6:55 PM, Stuart Halloway wrote: > > > Specializations are available where there is a clear use case, e.g. > > contains?, peek (instead of last), disj, etc. > ... > > Tying to concrete types is limiting. *Never* having special purpo

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

On Apr 28, 2010, at 6:38 PM, Mark Engelberg wrote: > 2. Rename contains? to contains-key? and make a function with the new > semantics called contains? Disadvantage - breaks existing code. You could also alias contains? to contains-key?, use seq-contains? (or some other new name) for this new

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

Wow, and I thought this was a sore subject before, when there was no seq-contains? and its absence was always a Top 5 FAQ. :-) I'll wait for Rich to maybe chime in on seq-contains?. Other than seq- contains? are people liking the new fns? Anybody having issues we didn't anticip

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 2:39 PM, Douglas Philips wrote: > If some function I call uses seq-contains? (so that it can get all the > wonderful seq-ness abstractness clojure offers) I should have to know that > internal detail and not pass in a map or set? or worse, fail to get an > optimization i

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

On 2010 Apr 28, at 6:06 PM, Meikel Brandmeyer wrote: Ah, ok. I misunderstood what you were saying. But I think it doesn't change the argumentation. If seq-contains? was fast on maps and sets, people would abandon contains? because seq-contains? is "always right": works on seqs, fast on maps and

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

On 2010 Apr 28, at 6:55 PM, Stuart Halloway wrote: Specializations are available where there is a clear use case, e.g. contains?, peek (instead of last), disj, etc. ... Tying to concrete types is limiting. *Never* having special purpose fns that know about performance characteristics is also

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

Another way to put it: If you wrote a protocol to pick a fast implementation based on type, then seq-contains? would be the fn that the protocol would call if it couldn't find anything faster. There have to be primitive things somewhere... If so, then why isn't there a vector-first and a li

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

On 2010 Apr 28, at 6:10 PM, Stuart Halloway wrote: The "seq" in "seq-contains?" says "I want a sequential search." Protocols *could* make this do something different, but that would violate the contract of this function. How would having it work faster if passed a set or map violate that?

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

The "seq" in "seq-contains?" says "I want a sequential search." Protocols *could* make this do something different, but that would violate the contract of this function. Another way to put it: If you wrote a protocol to pick a fast implementation based on type, then seq-contains? would be t

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

Hi, On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 05:39:37PM -0400, Douglas Philips wrote: > Stuart's comment was to not use seq-contains? on maps or sets. > There is no reason that it cannot be the same speed as contains? if > a set or map is passed in. Ah, ok. I misunderstood what you were saying. But I think it do

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

On 2010 Apr 28, at 5:32 PM, Meikel Brandmeyer wrote: On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 05:26:46PM -0400, Douglas Philips wrote: How is having an optimized version of seq-contains? for sets/maps any different from what Stuart showed in his video, where reduce can have a specialization that is faster on so

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

Hi, On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 05:26:46PM -0400, Douglas Philips wrote: > How is having an optimized version of seq-contains? for sets/maps > any different from what Stuart showed in his video, where reduce can > have a specialization that is faster on some types? A faster reduce is still O(N). If

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

On 2010 Apr 28, at 5:14 PM, Meikel Brandmeyer wrote: If you have a map or a set looking up a key is fast. So contains? is fast (read O(1) resp. something like O(log32 N)). seq-contains? does a linear search through a sequence. That is O(N). Protocols cannot change this. How is having an optimiz

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

Hi, On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 05:06:21PM -0400, Douglas Philips wrote: > Wait, what? Why should seq-contains? be slower than contains? Isn't > this exactly the kind of thing that protocols are supposed to be > solving? Your nice video showed that very thing, right? If you have a map or a set looki

Re: clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

On 2010 Apr 28, at 4:31 PM, Stuart Halloway wrote: After review, several seq functions from clojure-contrib have been promoted to clojure [1], [2], [3]. Hopefully the FAQ below will answer the major questions you may have: Cool! 3. Why did some of the fn names change? ...Similarly

clojure 1.2 seq fn enhancement FAQ

After review, several seq functions from clojure-contrib have been promoted to clojure [1], [2], [3]. Hopefully the FAQ below will answer the major questions you may have: 1. Is this a breaking change to Clojure? No. Rich is super-careful to grow Clojure by expansion, not by breaking

Re: for FAQ: what are use/require/import/refer?

On Dec 20, 12:44 pm, chris wrote: > 1.  Is using defs the best way to go about this?  They are global > variables; they model static state of the system, essentially.   Yes, global variables are probably best as Vars (which is what def creates). > 2.  How do defs handle updating when I reload a

Re: for FAQ: what are use/require/import/refer?

0, 9:53 am, Stuart Sierra wrote: > This might make a good FAQ question: > > On Dec 20, 11:25 am, chris wrote: > > > I am unclear as to the difference between refer, import use, and require. > > Hi Chris, > > require: Load a Clojure library from a file on classpat

Re: for FAQ: what are use/require/import/refer?

This would make an excellent FAQ question and answer! On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 9:53 AM, Stuart Sierra wrote: > > This might make a good FAQ question: > > On Dec 20, 11:25 am, chris wrote: > > I am unclear as to the difference between refer, import use, and require. > &g

for FAQ: what are use/require/import/refer?

This might make a good FAQ question: On Dec 20, 11:25 am, chris wrote: > I am unclear as to the difference between refer, import use, and require. Hi Chris, require: Load a Clojure library from a file on classpath. Use this when you want to load a library, but leave it in its own namesp

Re: FAQ

+1 to Mon Key's suggestions. Those are very FAQ-like questions. -Matt On Dec 19, 12:45 am, Mon Key wrote: > Some thoughts on really stupid things that have tripped me up: > > - How do I exit Clojure - srsly > C-c > > - Whatsa JVM - does this mean Clojure is reall

Re: FAQ

Not sure if the FAQ is the right place to put it, but I haven't seen any mention of this "gotcha" which could really trip some people up: http://w01fe.com/?p=32 Short version: hashing "immutable" Clojure collections that contain mutable Java objects can lead to confusi

Re: FAQ

Some thoughts on really stupid things that have tripped me up: - How do I exit Clojure - srsly C-c - Whatsa JVM - does this mean Clojure is really just Java with parens? - Whatsa Classpath? this answer presents the *ALL* important opportunity to mention that *nix uses `:' to separate paths wher

Re: FAQ

> Suggestions for entries welcome here. > > > > Rich > Here's another that was a "gotcha" for me for an hour or two... Why after using map/reduce/for to change a java object does the object remain unchanged? (defn initv1 [myseq] (let [v (java.util.Vector.)] (for [x myseq] (.addElement v x)) v))

Re: FAQ

> Suggestions for entries welcome here. > > Rich How about: What language constructs/objects may be found in the function position of an expression? Ii like the fact that sets, maps and vectors are all 'functions of their keys', and that keywords and symbols are functions of maps. ((([ + - ap

Re: FAQ

the REPL with "java -cp clojure.jar > > clojure.lang.Repl" > > That's a good FAQ suggestion, Kev. With the latest release, it's even > shorter! > 1. Download clojure_20081217.zip > 2. Run java -jar clojure.jar > This begs (for me at least) the question

Re: FAQ

On Dec 17, 6:28 pm, kkw wrote: > What's the recommended way of getting Clojure up and running? > - Download the latest snapshot with SVN > - Create the Clojure.jar file with Ant > - Test by starting up the REPL with "java -cp clojure.jar > clojure.lang.Repl" Tha

Re: FAQ

How about: What's the recommended way of getting Clojure up and running? - Download the latest snapshot with SVN - Create the Clojure.jar file with Ant - Test by starting up the REPL with "java -cp clojure.jar clojure.lang.Repl" Kev On Dec 18, 9:24 am, lpetit wrote: > Hello, > > > * Is there a

Re: FAQ

Hello, > * Is there an IDE for Clojure? > > Answer: There are plug-ins for Eclipse clojure-dev/> and NetBeans .  There's also > Emacs. Sincerely, clojure-dev (Eclipse plugin) is still currently in infancy. I think it's not fair for the emacs ver

Re: FAQ

Hi, Am 17.12.2008 um 17:34 schrieb Stuart Sierra: * Is there an IDE for Clojure? Answer: There are plug-ins for Eclipse and NetBeans . There's also Emacs. There is also Vim. Sincerely Meikel smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cry

Re: FAQ

On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 12:06 PM, Rich Hickey wrote: > On Dec 17, 11:50 am, "J. McConnell" wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 10:32 AM, Rich Hickey wrote: >> >> > The Clojure FAQ will be here: >> >> >http://code.google.com/p/clojure/wiki/FAQ >

Re: FAQ

On Dec 17, 11:50 am, "J. McConnell" wrote: > On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 10:32 AM, Rich Hickey wrote: > > > The Clojure FAQ will be here: > > >http://code.google.com/p/clojure/wiki/FAQ > > > Suggestions for entries welcome here. > > I rec

Re: FAQ

On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 10:32 AM, Rich Hickey wrote: > > The Clojure FAQ will be here: > > http://code.google.com/p/clojure/wiki/FAQ > > Suggestions for entries welcome here. I recently found out about Google Moderator (http://moderator.appspot.com/), which might be a good f

Re: FAQ

On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 11:34 AM, Stuart Sierra wrote: > > Suggestions, based on common questions in the group: These are good, Stuart, thanks! Except... > * Why doesn't #([%]) work? > > Answer: Because it expands to "(fn [x] ([x]))". #() always assumes > that the thing inside it is a functio

Re: FAQ

On Dec 17, 11:34 am, Stuart Sierra wrote: > On Dec 17, 10:32 am, Rich Hickey wrote: > > > The Clojure FAQ will be here: > > >http://code.google.com/p/clojure/wiki/FAQ > > > Suggestions for entries welcome here. > > Suggestions, based on common ques

Re: FAQ

On Dec 17, 10:32 am, Rich Hickey wrote: > The Clojure FAQ will be here: > > http://code.google.com/p/clojure/wiki/FAQ > > Suggestions for entries welcome here. Suggestions, based on common questions in the group: * Is there a repository for Clojure libraries? Answer

FAQ

The Clojure FAQ will be here: http://code.google.com/p/clojure/wiki/FAQ Suggestions for entries welcome here. Rich --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group,

Where is the Clojure FAQ?

Clojure needs a FAQ - a plain old school vanilla FAQ. Clojure.org is useful; The wiki is useful; The gg Group is useful; The /# clojure is useful; (doc some-fn) is useful; (show some-fn) is useful; None of these are a FAQ. None accomplish what a FAQ accomplishes. Lots of people look for a FAQ