Nevermind that. The answer is that as-> would "reduce arg order and destructuring expectations". Makes sense. So for whatever small amount it is worth I officially have been convinced of all the new names.
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 12:08 PM, Alex Baranosky < alexander.barano...@gmail.com> wrote: > The more I watch this conversation, the more I like some-> and cond->. > What was the motivation for changing let-> to as-> ? let-> made a lot of > sense as a name to me. > > > On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 6:48 AM, Rich Hickey <richhic...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I'll argue that if 'e' in conde is enough to imply 'each' then '->' in >> cond-> is enough to imply it keeps threading. >> >> I think many people have ideas about -> operators born of some of these >> libraries that supply a wealth of 'things you can use in ->'. Most of >> their operators have '->' in their names, but don't fundamentally thread - >> e.g. they are terminators or one shots like if-> (or ->if). >> >> A op-> operator, IMO, should take an open set of expressions and thread >> the return values through them in some way. Otherwise it shouldn't be an >> op->. >> >> When one reads -> as 'thread' vs 'for use in threading', things might >> become clearer. >> >> >> On Dec 1, 2012, at 9:31 AM, Steve Miner wrote: >> >> > gate-> would work. Like guard-> it doesn't have any connotations in >> the Clojure world, but it's learnable. I'll add one more: qual-> ... short >> for "qualified threading macro". Each clause is qualified by a test >> condition. >> > >> > Of course, there's always conde-> to borrow from miniKanren and >> core.logic. The "e" stands for "every" because multiple clauses can >> succeed as opposed to the short-circuiting cond. >> > >> > >> > On Nov 30, 2012, at 2:49 PM, Rich Hickey <richhic...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> >> >> >> On Nov 30, 2012, at 1:49 PM, Steve Miner wrote: >> >> >> >>> I propose guard-> to avoid the cond-> confusion. >> >>> >> >> >> >> Yeah, that came up. Guards in other langs are short circuiting, just >> like cond. >> >> >> >> Another in that camp was gate-> >> > >> > -- >> > 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 >> >> -- >> 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 >> > > -- 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
