Using threading operators + anonymous functions sometimes yields more
succinct code than using HOF,
especially because 'partial' and 'comp' are such long names:
(comp count (partial filter nil?) (partial map foo))
#(->> % (map foo) (filter nil?) count)
On Sunday, August 12, 2012 7:35:16 PM UT
Should be (filter (comp not nil?) coll)
On Sunday, August 12, 2012 9:44:11 PM UTC+2, Pierre-Henry Perret wrote:
>
> I prefer (filter (partial not nil?) coll) as a HOF
>
> Le dimanche 12 août 2012 20:46:59 UTC+2, rmarianski a écrit :
>>
>> On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 11:22:55AM -0700, Takahiro Hozumi
This doesn't work.
On Sunday, August 12, 2012 12:44:11 PM UTC-7, Pierre-Henry Perret wrote:
>
> I prefer (filter (partial not nil?) coll) as a HOF
>
> Le dimanche 12 août 2012 20:46:59 UTC+2, rmarianski a écrit :
>>
>> On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 11:22:55AM -0700, Takahiro Hozumi wrote:
>> > > (fil
I prefer (filter (partial not nil?) coll) as a HOF
Le dimanche 12 août 2012 20:46:59 UTC+2, rmarianski a écrit :
>
> On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 11:22:55AM -0700, Takahiro Hozumi wrote:
> > > (filter (partial not nil?) coll)
> > You mean (filter (comp not nil?) coll).
> > I'm not sure which is mo
On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 11:22:55AM -0700, Takahiro Hozumi wrote:
> > (filter (partial not nil?) coll)
> You mean (filter (comp not nil?) coll).
> I'm not sure which is more readable, but thanks for Meikel and Alex, I now
> prefer (remove nil? coll).
remove is better in this case, but for posterit
> (filter (partial not nil?) coll)
You mean (filter (comp not nil?) coll).
I'm not sure which is more readable, but thanks for Meikel and Alex, I now
prefer (remove nil? coll).
Thanks.
On Monday, August 13, 2012 2:38:23 AM UTC+9, Tamreen Khan (Scriptor) wrote:
>
> Is the last one considered gene
m
Gesendet: So, 12 Aug 2012, 19:35:16 MESZ
Betreff: Pattern of Succinctness
Hi,
I would like to know common technics that make code succinct.
For example:
(or (:b {:a 1}) 0)
(:b {:a 1} 0)
(if-not x 1 2)
(if x 2 1)
(filter #(not (nil? %)) coll)
(filter identity coll) ;; nearly equal
Please let m
(filter identity foos) and (filter #(not (nil? %)) foos) aren't equivalent.
I prefer (remove nil? foos) Succint and direct.
On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 11:13 PM, Bill Caputo wrote:
>
> On Aug 12, 2012, at 12:38 PM, Tamreen Khan wrote:
>
> (filter #(not (nil? %)) coll)
>> (filter identity coll) ;;
Hi,
in case you really want only nils filtered out:
(filter (complement nil?) coll)
or
(remove nil? coll)
Kind regards
Meikel
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Bill Caputo
An: Tamreen Khan
Cc: clojure@googlegroups.com
Gesendet: So, 12 Aug 2012, 19:43:58 MESZ
Betreff: Re: Pattern of
On Aug 12, 2012, at 12:38 PM, Tamreen Khan wrote:
> (filter #(not (nil? %)) coll)
> (filter identity coll) ;; nearly equal
> Is the last one considered generally more readable? I think the following is
> clearer while still not having as much noise as the first filter example:
>
> (filter (part
Is the last one considered generally more readable? I think the following
is clearer while still not having as much noise as the first filter example:
(filter (partial not nil?) coll)
On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Takahiro Hozumi wrote:
> Hi,
> I would like to know common technics that make c
Hi,
I would like to know common technics that make code succinct.
For example:
(or (:b {:a 1}) 0)
(:b {:a 1} 0)
(if-not x 1 2)
(if x 2 1)
(filter #(not (nil? %)) coll)
(filter identity coll) ;; nearly equal
Please let me know any tips you found.
Cheers,
Takahiro.
--
You received this message
12 matches
Mail list logo
