Max Penet <m...@qbits.cc> writes: Hi Max,
>> user> ((some-fn) <no-matter-what>) >> false >> user> ((every-pred) <no-matter-what>) >> true >> >> e.g. (some-cn) was equivalent to (constantly false) and (every-pred) was >> equivalent to (constantly true). > > Yes I understand that, the proposal was just to avoid exceptions when > used with apply, but this could end up be bit confusing maybe, and it > can be tested beforehand anyway. No, I think it's a valid request and it wouldn't be more confusing than (and) => true (or) => false. I'll create a ticket and patch for it. Bye, Tassilo -- 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
