2012/6/8 Cédric Pineau <cedric.pin...@gmail.com> > > 2012/6/8 Ambrose Bonnaire-Sergeant <abonnaireserge...@gmail.com> > >> No. I assume you mean seqable. >> >> If it did exist, it would look something like: >> >> Is there a simple test for sequable? > > > Oh ok, I don't get the difference between seq and seqable.. > > I think I got it : (seqable? a) check if a can be transform into a seq (seq? a) check if a _is_ a seq
Sorry for the noise :-) -- Cédric -- 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
