+1
2012年11月4日日曜日 7時27分24秒 UTC+9 CGAT:
>
> It would be nice if clojure.core/conj had a unary implementation
>
>([coll] coll)
>
> The motivating use case is when one is conjoining sequences of
> items to a collection all at once:
>
>(apply conj coll seqable)
>
> such as (apply conj #
I created CLJ-1103 and attached a patch that makes this change, as well as
related changes to conj! assoc assoc! and dissoc! (dissoc, disj and disj!
already handled these cases).
http://dev.clojure.org/jira/browse/CLJ-1103
Andy
On Nov 4, 2012, at 5:52 AM, Jonathan Fischer Friberg wrote:
> It
On Sunday, November 4, 2012 12:43:22 AM UTC+1, Ben wrote:
> There might be a reason to write (apply f coll seqable) in a situation
> in which f might be conj, though.
>
One may use (reduce f coll seqable) instead, if that makes sense
semantically in that context.
--
You received this message
>
> It would be nice if clojure.core/conj had a unary implementation
>
>([coll] coll)
>
I support this. Reasons:
1. It makes sense, adding nothing to something should give back the
something.
2. It's consistent with disj as mentioned.
3. Supporting edge cases like this can make some algorithm
That's a good point Alan, and I should have mentioned into.
But this came up for me in a situation relevant to Ben's' point.
I was adding or removing a computed sequence of elements of a set based on
some other
input and was using either conj or disj depending on that input, with apply.
It worked
There might be a reason to write (apply f coll seqable) in a situation
in which f might be conj, though.
On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 4:25 PM, Alan Malloy wrote:
> There is never a reason to write (apply conj ...). Instead, use `into`,
> which does the same thing but faster and with fewer characters.
>
There is never a reason to write (apply conj ...). Instead, use `into`,
which does the same thing but faster and with fewer characters.
On Saturday, November 3, 2012 3:27:24 PM UTC-7, CGAT wrote:
>
> It would be nice if clojure.core/conj had a unary implementation
>
>([coll] coll)
>
> Th
It would be nice if clojure.core/conj had a unary implementation
([coll] coll)
The motivating use case is when one is conjoining sequences of
items to a collection all at once:
(apply conj coll seqable)
such as (apply conj #{1 2 3} [2 4 6 8 10]).
Currently (1.4.0), this will rais
