Tassilo Horn <t...@gnu.org> writes: >>> 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.
Done, see http://dev.clojure.org/jira/browse/CLJ-1094 In contrast to what's written above, I decided to make (some-fn) to be (constantly nil), which matches the behavior of `some` better than (constantly false). 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
