Jim,
Thanks for the idioms, I appreciate it!
And thanks everyone for the help!
On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 8:43:40 AM UTC-5, Jim foo.bar wrote:
>
> On 21/01/14 13:11, Chris Perkins wrote:
> > This part: (some #{hashed} already-seen) is doing a linear lookup in
> > `already-seen`. Try (contains? already-seen hashed) instead.
>
> +1 to that as it will become faster...
>
> I would also add the following not so related to performance:
>
> (drop1 (line-seqf)) ==> (next(line-seqf))
>
>
> (ifseen? nil [url hashed]) ==> (when-not seen?[url hashed])
>
> (ifseen? nil hashed) ==>(when-not seen? hashed)
>
> (if(seq(restlines))... ==> (if(seqlines)...
>
>
> I actually think the last one is a bug...it seems to me that you are
> skipping one row in the condition...you pass (rest lines) every time you
> recurse yes?
> checking for more lines should be done for *all* current lines, not (rest
> current-lines)...unless I 've misunderstood something...
>
>
> Jim
>
>
>
--
--
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.
