Thanks for the replies. Indeed, I have been approaching the issue with
destructuring, as suggested. It still seems to me that reduce* is
consistent with the behaviour of map, in that it is polyvariadic and
doesn't require packing arguments into and out of a single sequence.
However, its good to kno
2010/6/11 Nathan Sorenson :
> Is there a way to fold over multiple sequences, in the same way that
> 'map' can apply a multi-parameter function over several seqs? In other
> words, is there a function like this:
There is no need for a special purpose reduce* function.
Using destructing binding as
To me this application screams destructuring. Assume you want to
(reduce + ...) a collection of sequences. I'd lead off with a simple
vector mapping operation, and the reduce over the following sequence
like so:
user=>(reduce
(fn [[acc-x acc-y] [x y]]
[(+ acc-x x) (+ acc-y y)])
(map ve
On 11 Jun 2010, at 08:59, Nathan Sorenson wrote:
> Is there a way to fold over multiple sequences, in the same way that
> 'map' can apply a multi-parameter function over several seqs? In other
> words, is there a function like this:
>
> (defn reduce*
> [f val & colls]
> (reduce (fn [a
