As a bit of a newbie to the functional + identity/state design space,
I'm struggling a bit with where to use identity constructs (refs) and
where to stay with pure functions, and could use some guidance. Pardon
me if some of my terms are a bit off. Here is a simple hypothetical
app for matching App
Thank you all, the replies so far and the questions have already
deepened my understanding considerably!
Looking forward to more. I think a bit more discussion like this (not
necessarily my quite skimpy example) would be quite valuable to many
like me.
--
You received this message because you ar
Re: Emacs + Slime + paredit. I did not see Clojure listed as supported
for Slime and paredit. Do you know if:
- AquaEmacs (mac) is a shoe-in?
- Can you do all Slime stuff in Clojure? evaluate, macro-expand, docs,
etc?
- Same for par-edit
Thanks!
On Mar 4, 1:56 pm, Baishampayan Ghose wrote:
> Wi
Would a Clojure app benefit sigificantly from a declarative functional
UI along the lines of
Lunascript http://www.asana.com/luna or FlapJax http://www.flapjax-lang.org/
?
The results look quite impressive ... but I don't have much to compare
to in Clojure. I am relatively new to both Clojure and
Just tried this with NetBeans 6.7.1 on OSX 10.5.8. Got through all
setup steps with no problem. When I try to start the project REPL, I
get:
"There did not appear to be both valid clojure and clojure-contrib
jars present in the classpath... (some paths to ...1.2.0-master-
SNAPSHOT.jar)"
If I elec
Really nice!
Is it aware of all Clojure structures, including maps etc?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient w
(deftype Account [owner balance])
(deftype Person [accounts])
joe has 1 account.
How to I create / initialize joe & the account with mutual references?
I'd rather not use refs.
Thanks!
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this
Is this a Clojure restriction, or is it intrinsic to functional
programming?
If my app is essentially about a user creating and editing a graph
structure (sometimes via crud-level interactions, other times by
somewhat larger refactorings), is either Clojure or functional not a
good match?
Thanks
> It's a consequence of immutable data structures, which are an aspect of
> functional programming. An immutable object can never be changed
But single-assignment is a quite valid (and more flexible?) form of
immutability. I'm not convinced cycles are intrinsically tied to it in
any way.
(In fa
Why this behavior?
user=> (#{5 nil} 5)
5
user=> (#{5 nil} 4)
nil
user=> (#{5 nil} nil)
nil
rather than the seemingly more informative:
user=> (#{5 nil} 5)
true
user=> (#{5 nil} 4)
false
user=> (#{5 nil} nil)
true
user=> (#{5 false} true)
false
user=> (#{5 false} false)
true
i.e. set as character
On Apr 6, 8:09 am, Christophe Grand wrote:
>
> Let say one can write:
> (def john-doe {:name "John Doe" :email "j...@doe.com" :account {:owner
> # :balance 1000}})
At this point the cyclic structure is a consistent value. As long as
updates create new values that match the domain invariants, why
Please don't misunderstand this post - it is not asking for a change
of syntax, just trying to understand something.
Clojure has chosen positional parameters (just like for Lisp, C, C++,
Java, Ruby, Python, Prolog, ...)
Smalltalk composes a full method name from a prefix-name + named
parameters.
On Apr 6, 12:16 am, Alex Osborne wrote:
> Calling the set as if it is a fn is a short-hand for "get", that is
> retrieving an element from the set. Why would you want to do this, when
> to look it up you need to know what element is? Sets are based on
> value-equality not reference-equality. T
On Apr 6, 4:46 pm, Jarkko Oranen wrote:
> problem is that they also make some very common functional patterns
> cumbersome: most notably function application (ie. apply),
> composition, and higher-order functions.
I don't think it should be either-or (and positional would be needed
anyway to call
On Apr 6, 5:23 pm, Stuart Halloway wrote:
> Have you seen destructuring of rest args in the current master branch?
>
> (defn foo [& {:keys [a b c]}] [a b c])
>
> (foo :a 1 :c 3)
> => [1 nil 3]
>
> With this last bit of sugar in place I am extremely happy with
> Clojure's arg handling.
Hmmm. Loo
Don't you think
- fixed-order named parameters
could (should?) be a separate issue from
- optional, any-order, named parameters
?
;; :x :y are fixed order, named, while :a :b are optional, named
(defn foo [:x :y & {:keys [a b]] [x, y, a, b])
(foo :x 1 :y 2)
=> [1 2 nil nil]
(foo :x 1 :a 2)
=
I would really love to see (clearly by someone much smarter than I :)
an insightful summary of these kinds of concept-heavy discussions,
"stickied" or "FAQd" or even "book'd" somewhere.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this g
On Apr 6, 7:03 pm, ataggart wrote:
> See:
>
> http://richhickey.github.com/clojure-contrib/def-api.html#clojure.con...
Ah, thank you (all).
Will this be in 1.2? Is run-time cost expected to be minor, and will
passing unrecognized keys be an error?
--
You received this message because you are s
On Apr 7, 7:56 am, David Nolen wrote:
> The runtime cost of destructuring is not worth getting worked up
> about. It's easy to check this yourself with (time ...)
Results below:
user=> (defn fk [& {:keys [a b c]}] (+ a b c))
user=> (defn fp [a b c] (+ a b c))
user=> (time (dotimes [_ 100]
On Apr 7, 12:37 pm, Armando Blancas wrote:
> in other languages they'd be annotations and maybe perceived
> as redundant, e.g. a call like: (circle x y radius) is readable
Ah, but what about:
(circle year population income)
vs.
(circle :x year :y population :r income)
> In Smtalltalk a single-ar
On Apr 8, 11:08 am, David Nolen wrote:
> In my own code I only avoid the convenience of destructuring in the
> rare tight loops such as calculations intended to drive animations.
But when you write a function you would have to decide positional vs.
keyword. Would you then take a guess about usage
(deftype A [x]) gives me an accessor (:x anA)
Then I decide to change data representation of A without impacting
client code, but I don't seem able to define a function
(defn :x [anA] ...)
Should I be doing something different?
Thanks!
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to
I see downloads named
- Java SE (45MB)
- Java FX (76MB)
- Java (146MB) - apparently includes Sun Glassfish Server & what-not
I'm using OSX 10.5.8, and just want to install the easiest Netbeans
(with Enclojure) to for development with Compojure.
Would I use Compojure with Jetty? Apache (buil
I had trouble with Enclojure 1.1.1
What worked for me: uninstall it and follow the Netbeans section at
http://github.com/relevance/labrepl
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
N
On Apr 29, 3:21 am, ataggart wrote:
> Functions named contains-key? and contains-val? would make a lot more
> sense to me than the current contains? and new seq-contains?.
Amen. Even independent of any performance expectations.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Go
25 matches
Mail list logo
