On Jun 17, 2:47 pm, Kyle Schaffrick <k...@raidi.us> wrote: > As a friendly suggestion, I'd like to offer that perhaps the derision is > caused not by the fact that you had the initiative to implement it > yourself, but rather by such phrasing as: > > > I'm shocked that [reduce/accum/foldr] is missing from clojure.core. > > [...] This is one of the most basic, useful functions in functional > > programming. > > This seems to assert *as fact* that it is missing
Well *something* was certainly missing, or I would have found it. You can't reasonably claim I was lax in my search efforts in this instance. > perhaps worst of all, suggests incompetence on the developers' part for > excluding it. I didn't intend to suggest anything of the sort, only surprise. I have the feeling that clojure is still slightly incomplete, based on a number of factors including the way it's discussed here and that there's no later version than 1.0 apparent yet, so I do expect to find the odd thing is missing, from the core or from the docs, from time to time, and I don't take that or intend it to be taken as implying incompetence on anyone's part, just youth on the part of the entire project. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 with your first post. 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
