Irakli Gozalishvili <rfo...@gmail.com> writes:
> Maybe something else can be considered like `includes?` to do that
> instead ? Also Rich says no better name was suggest for includes?, I
> think `has?` would have being a lot better name. Don't know if it
> makes sense to reply to that post at this point.
I think member? is a rather good name:
(defn member?
"Returns true iff `e` is a member of `coll`."
[e ^java.util.Collection coll]
(if (seq coll)
(.contains coll e)
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
---
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.
