user> (every? identity []) true I think I understand now, this might be to match the behavior of "every?".
Max On Thursday, October 25, 2012 12:31:57 PM UTC+2, Max Penet wrote: > > Hello, > > I am trying to understand the rationale behind the current implementation > of some-fn and every-pred, there seems to be a couple of odd things, or > maybe that is just me misunderstanding their doc. > > user> ((every-pred (fn [_]))) > true > user> ((some-fn (fn [_]))) > nil > > Shouldn't the first example return false? since the first function always > returns nil? > > I was also wondering if it would make sense to add a 0 argument version of > these, it would make their usage with apply more convenient, and comp which > has a smiliar signature behaves like that: > > user> ((comp) true) > true > > user> ((some-fn) true) > ; Evaluation aborted. > > user> ((every-pred) true) > ; Evaluation aborted. > > Max > -- 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
