> On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 9:15 PM, Stefan Rohlfing
> <stefan.rohlf...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I personally find Stuart's suggestion to be the most readable. The use of
>> the ->> macro makes the workflow quite easy to follow.
> 
> Yes, both the -> and ->> macros are useful.  Unfortunately, about half
> of Clojure's functions put the "object" you're operating on first, and
> the other half put it last.  -> works best with the former, and ->>
> with the latter.

This is hardly unfortunate! The API is carefully designed: object args come 
first, seq args come last.

> Stuart's code is readable because he found a way to structure it all
> in terms of functions that put the main object last.  I find that in
> most code, you end up with a mixture of the two types of functions,
> and then those macros aren't quite so useful.

I didn't have to find a way to structure the code. Knowing I was working with 
seqs, the use of ->> was automatic. The mixing happens when you are doing mixed 
things.

Stuart Halloway
Clojure/core
http://clojure.com

-- 
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

Reply via email to