Re: one argument versions of conj and disj would be very nice

2011-03-22 Thread Sunil S Nandihalli
Thanks Ken .. "into" is cool .. it does better.. Sunil. On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Ken Wesson wrote: > On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 5:08 AM, Shantanu Kumar > wrote: > > On Mar 22, 1:15 pm, Sunil S Nandihalli > > wrote: > >> Hello everybody, > >> I was wondering why there is no 1 argument ver

Re: one argument versions of conj and disj would be very nice

2011-03-22 Thread Ken Wesson
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 5:08 AM, Shantanu Kumar wrote: > On Mar 22, 1:15 pm, Sunil S Nandihalli > wrote: >> Hello everybody, >>  I was wondering why there is no 1 argument version of conj and disj. I >> think that would be very convenient. Especially when used in the following >> way >> >> (apply

Re: one argument versions of conj and disj would be very nice

2011-03-22 Thread Sunil S Nandihalli
Thanks Shanthanu .. Sunil. On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 2:38 PM, Shantanu Kumar wrote: > > > On Mar 22, 1:15 pm, Sunil S Nandihalli > wrote: > > Hello everybody, > > I was wondering why there is no 1 argument version of conj and disj. I > > think that would be very convenient. Especially when used i

Re: one argument versions of conj and disj would be very nice

2011-03-22 Thread Shantanu Kumar
On Mar 22, 1:15 pm, Sunil S Nandihalli wrote: > Hello everybody, >  I was wondering why there is no 1 argument version of conj and disj. I > think that would be very convenient. Especially when used in the following > way > > (apply conj some-collection collection-of-elements-to-be-conjed) > > C