On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 9:06 AM, Rich Hickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Dec 6, 7:52 pm, André Thieme <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> (for [x (range 1 20) :when (> x 8) :while (< 0 (rem x 13))] x) ==> >> java.lang.Exception: Unsupported binding form: :while >> >> But: >> (for [x (range 1 20) :when (> x 8)] x) ==> >> (9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19) >> >> And: >> (for [x (range 1 20) :while (< 0 (rem x 13))] x) ==> >> (1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12) >> >> Is it intended that there can be at most one condition per binding? > > That's how it is currently implemented, but I'm for allowing both.
doseq currently supports both. If both appear on the same binding, the :while is always test first regardless of the order in which they appear in the doseq. The thinking is that if the :while is false, there's no need to check the :when. Is this Good, and should 'for' work the same way? --Chouser --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
