On Wednesday, February 27, 2013 6:28:03 PM UTC+1, Andy Fingerhut wrote: If you wanted to create a collection of idiomatic Clojure programs for > solving a particular set of problems, e.g. the Benchmarks Game problems, as > soon as more than one person submitted a program and/or reviewed a program, > there could arise arguments over which ones are idiomatic and which are not. > > If one person is maintaining the collection, they can make judgement calls > on this, and/or keep multiple different submissions around to solve the > same problem as all equally idiomatic, even though they use different code > constructs to do it. > There is much truth in this; however, I bet that all those programs could in fact be considered idomatic from a wider perspective. One guy prefers * (reduce...assoc)* where another prefers *(into {}...map...)* and that's OK. However, if someone comes along with *(let [m (HashMap.)] (loop []...(recur (.put m ...)))* claiming that is in fact idomatic, he's just being unreasonable---by everyone's agreement. Yes, in the final analysis there will always be a fine dividing line over which everyone involved will love to disagree, but that's a lesser concern.
-Marko -- -- 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 unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.