Hi,
Am 18.12.2009 um 04:18 schrieb Joseph Smith:
> What are you using to generate the pretty rainbow perens on your website?
I use Vim to do the highlighting. VimClojure does the rainbow parens.
Sincerely
Meikel
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Cl
What are you using to generate the pretty rainbow perens on your website?
---
Joseph Smith
j...@uwcreations.com
(402)601-5443
On Dec 17, 2009, at 5:25 PM, Meikel Brandmeyer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Am 16.12.2009 um 17:26 schrieb Meikel Brandmeyer:
>
>> Well. It was claimed it is cleaner... Just a
Hi,
Am 16.12.2009 um 17:26 schrieb Meikel Brandmeyer:
> Well. It was claimed it is cleaner... Just asking...
I wrote down my thoughts in a small blog post: http://tr.im/HW5P
Sincerely
Meikel
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post
Hi,
On Dec 16, 4:30 pm, Laurent PETIT wrote:
> Hey, the exercise was to rewrite it with higher order functions, not to make
> it clearer !
Well. It was claimed it is cleaner... Just asking...
Sincerely
Meikel
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Cloju
Hey, the exercise was to rewrite it with higher order functions, not to make
it clearer !
2009/12/16 Meikel Brandmeyer
> Hi,
>
> On Dec 15, 10:28 pm, DTH wrote:
>
> > Damn, well played sir; that's much cleaner.
>
> Someone, please enlighten me!
>
> Why is this clearer?
>
> (defn foo
> [a]
> (
On Dec 16, 8:13 am, Laurent PETIT wrote:
> 2009/12/15 DTH
> >
> > (return-fn (some predicate-fn (iterate recur-fn a0)))
>
> > would seem equivalent, though I doubt I'd have got there without your
> > stepwise guide to change the way I was thinking about it.
>
> No, some does not work here. Dean g
Hi,
On Dec 15, 10:28 pm, DTH wrote:
> Damn, well played sir; that's much cleaner.
Someone, please enlighten me!
Why is this clearer?
(defn foo
[a]
(let [b f1
c (comp f2 b)
d (comp f3 c)
e (comp f4 d)
g (comp f5 c)
h (comp f5 f2 e)]
(->> (iterate
On Dec 16, 6:00 am, samppi wrote:
> I'm trying to rewrite a loop to use higher-level functions instead.
;; Here is my 'novelty' answer... just for fun! [not a serious
answer] ;;
(defn bounce
[start pred iter]
(trampoline
(fn f [x]
(if (pred x)
x
(fn []
(f
Hello,
2009/12/15 DTH
> On Dec 15, 9:05 pm, Laurent PETIT wrote:
> >
> > The final step is to apply return-fn to the result:
> > (return-fn
> > (first (remove
> > (comp not predicate-fn)
> > (iterate recur-fn a0)))
> >
>
> Damn, well played sir; that's
On Dec 15, 9:05 pm, Laurent PETIT wrote:
>
> The final step is to apply return-fn to the result:
> (return-fn
> (first (remove
> (comp not predicate-fn)
> (iterate recur-fn a0)))
>
Damn, well played sir; that's much cleaner. If I might offer one
small tw
On Dec 15, 7:33 pm, Zach Tellman wrote:
> At first glance I don't see a clean to make this completely higher-
> order, but here's a shorter (albeit a little messy) version:
>
> (loop [a a0]
> (let [[a b c d e] (reduce #(conj %1 (%2 (last %1))) [a] [f1 f2 f3
> f4])
> g (f5 c)
>
Hi,
Am 15.12.2009 um 20:06 schrieb Sean Devlin:
> Could you re-write this w/ comp, and repost?
Because you need all intermediate results comp is totally useless here. (Unless
you want to recompute everything several times, of course. But that might be
prohobitive due to performance reasons...)
Wonderful. I'm still getting used to juggling functions like this,
rather than doing standard loops. But it's so much cleaner.
Thanks again, everyone; your explanations showed me not only how to
solve my problem, but to organize my logic better too.
On Dec 15, 2:32 pm, Laurent PETIT wrote:
> Of
Of course you're right. I couldn't remember filter, was somehow "stuck" with
some which does not do the job of course, and playing with the doc did not
help since my version of clojure still has the bug on filter's lack of
documentation :-)
2009/12/15 Sean Devlin
> On Dec 15, 4:05 pm, Laurent PE
On Dec 15, 4:05 pm, Laurent PETIT wrote:
> Hello,
>
> it seems to me that your example is unnecessary complicated.
> Let's refactor it a bit before trying to obtain your goal.
>
> First,
>
> your example can be, for the purpose of your goal, simplified as :
>
> (loop [a a0]
> (if (predicate-fn a
Hello,
it seems to me that your example is unnecessary complicated.
Let's refactor it a bit before trying to obtain your goal.
First,
your example can be, for the purpose of your goal, simplified as :
(loop [a a0]
(if (predicate-fn a)
(return-fn a)
(recur (recur-fn a
So now, what
At first glance I don't see a clean to make this completely higher-
order, but here's a shorter (albeit a little messy) version:
(loop [a a0]
(let [[a b c d e] (reduce #(conj %1 (%2 (last %1))) [a] [f1 f2 f3
f4])
g (f5 c)
h (-> e f2 f5)]
(if (or (f6? b) (<= g h))
Could you re-write this w/ comp, and repost?
On Dec 15, 2:00 pm, samppi wrote:
> I'm trying to rewrite a loop to use higher-level functions instead.
> For pure functions f1, f2, f3, f4, f5, f6?, and f7, and a Clojure
> object a0, how can one rewrite the following loop to use map, reduce,
> etc.?
I'm trying to rewrite a loop to use higher-level functions instead.
For pure functions f1, f2, f3, f4, f5, f6?, and f7, and a Clojure
object a0, how can one rewrite the following loop to use map, reduce,
etc.?
(loop [a a0]
(let [b (f1 a)
c (f2 b)
d (f3 c)
e (f4
19 matches
Mail list logo
