I prefer map for turning one sequence into another sequence of equal
length. I generally only use for when I need a cartesian product of
multiple sequences, or am going to leverage :let, :when, or :while in
the binding.
On Jun 28, 11:48 am, Oleg wrote:
> I will show example based on hiccup libra
I'd prefer the for-version in this case.
You see the differences if you try `for` and `map` with multiple collections.
`for` is a traditional list-comprehension (1).
`map` iterates over many sequences at once, `for` does "nested" iteration.
(1): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_comprehension#Clo
I will show example based on hiccup library:
For version: [:ol (for [x coll] [:li x])]
Map version: [:ol (map (fn [x] [:li x]) coll)]
What's the difference between them? What is better for performance?
Cheers, Oleg
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "C
