With apologies for 3 questions in 1 day:
(def a {:foo {:cat 20
:dog 30}
:bar "hi"})
(let [{{cat :cat
dog :dog} :foo
bar :bar} a]
[cat dog bar])
(leth [{:foo {:cat cat
:dog dog}
:bar bar} a]
[cat dog bar])
I don't understand the reason why existing let key destructuring is
"backwards"
To me, it seems the fictional leth example is much "simpler" -- the mental
model is just "do pattern matching"
The current let example seems to be: "okay, um, so for "cat", you look at
:cat, then you look at :foo", then you think (:cat (:foo a)) -- which seems
much more work and error prone.
Question:
Where can I read up on the rationale behind the current design of map
destructuring in let?
Thanks!
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
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 [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
