On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 11:46 AM, Frantisek Sodomka <fsodo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > What about 'conj'? Documentation says: > (conj nil item) returns (item). > > Currently: > user=> (conj nil 1) > (1) > user=> (conj () 1) > (1)
Is there something wrong with that? It looks right and like it matches the docs to me. > Idiom "conj nil" is used in 'reverse': (reduce conj nil coll) > Currently: > user=> (reverse [1 2]) > (2 1) > user=> (reverse [1]) > (1) > user=> (reverse []) > nil > > It looks that now all sequence functions return () instead of nil. Is > 'reverse' correct? Things that return lazy seqs now return an empty lazy seq, which prints as (), instead of nil. However, 'reverse' is not lazy and normally returns a PersistentList. I don't know that it'd be more correct to return an empty PersistentList than to return nil as it does now. --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 clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
