Call for volunteers to help moderate a ClojureScript Google group
Glad to help. -- -- 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
Re: if-let/when-let
Sorry guys, I forget to mention that it should behave like let in Clojure or like let* in Scheme. I mean e.g.: (if-let* [x 1 y nil z (inc y)] (+ x y z) 0) ; = 0 ;; (inc y) shouldn't be evaluated here. Which means and doesn't work there. In terms of implementation I mean smth like that: (defmacro if-let* ([bindings then] `(if-let* ~bindings ~then nil)) ([bindings then else] (if (seq bindings) `(if-let [~(first bindings) ~(second bindings)] (if-let* ~(drop 2 bindings) ~then ~else) ~else) then))) But anyway I'm more interested in history of that behavior rather than implementation. Because for me it seems logical if let support more than two forms if-let also could do that. And I'd like to understand: Am I wrong or it's just historical reason? Ed On Friday, January 4, 2013 1:29:41 PM UTC+6, Andy Fingerhut wrote: I don't know the history of the answer to why, except perhaps as hinted by Evan's answer, which is that it becomes implicit how to combine the results of the multiple values to get the final true/false for the if condition. You imply and, which is a perfectly reasonable choice. My main reason for responding is to let you know that if you really want such behavior, macros let you roll your own without much trouble. Andy On Jan 3, 2013, at 10:24 PM, Edward Tsech wrote: Hey guys, if-let and when-let macros support only 2 forms in binding vector: (if-let [x 1 y 2] ...) java.lang.IllegalArgumentExcepdtion: if-let requires exactly 2 forms in binding vector(NO_SOURCE_FILE:1) Why doesn't if-let support any even amount of binding forms as let does? e.g. (if-let [x 1 y 2 z 3] (+ x y z) 0) ; = 6 (if-let [x 1 y nil z 3] (+ x y z) 0) ; = 0 Thanks! -- 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
Re: if-let/when-let
Thanks Dave! Seems like different people expect slightly different behavior. On Friday, January 4, 2013 9:34:38 PM UTC+6, daveray wrote: I don't know if it will answer your history question, but there was a fairly long discussion about this last year: https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!searchin/clojure/let-else/clojure/1g5dEvIvGYY/EWjwFGnS-rYJ Cheers, Dave On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 7:23 AM, Edward Tsech edt...@gmail.comjavascript: wrote: Sorry guys, I forget to mention that it should behave like let in Clojure or like let* in Scheme. I mean e.g.: (if-let* [x 1 y nil z (inc y)] (+ x y z) 0) ; = 0 ;; (inc y) shouldn't be evaluated here. Which means and doesn't work there. In terms of implementation I mean smth like that: (defmacro if-let* ([bindings then] `(if-let* ~bindings ~then nil)) ([bindings then else] (if (seq bindings) `(if-let [~(first bindings) ~(second bindings)] (if-let* ~(drop 2 bindings) ~then ~else) ~else) then))) But anyway I'm more interested in history of that behavior rather than implementation. Because for me it seems logical if let support more than two forms if-let also could do that. And I'd like to understand: Am I wrong or it's just historical reason? Ed On Friday, January 4, 2013 1:29:41 PM UTC+6, Andy Fingerhut wrote: I don't know the history of the answer to why, except perhaps as hinted by Evan's answer, which is that it becomes implicit how to combine the results of the multiple values to get the final true/false for the if condition. You imply and, which is a perfectly reasonable choice. My main reason for responding is to let you know that if you really want such behavior, macros let you roll your own without much trouble. Andy On Jan 3, 2013, at 10:24 PM, Edward Tsech wrote: Hey guys, if-let and when-let macros support only 2 forms in binding vector: (if-let [x 1 y 2] ...) java.lang.IllegalArgumentExcepdtion: if-let requires exactly 2 forms in binding vector(NO_SOURCE_FILE:1) Why doesn't if-let support any even amount of binding forms as let does? e.g. (if-let [x 1 y 2 z 3] (+ x y z) 0) ; = 6 (if-let [x 1 y nil z 3] (+ x y z) 0) ; = 0 Thanks! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clo...@googlegroups.comjavascript: Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+u...@googlegroups.com javascript: 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
if-let/when-let
Hey guys, if-let and when-let macros support only 2 forms in binding vector: (if-let [x 1 y 2] ...) java.lang.IllegalArgumentExcepdtion: if-let requires exactly 2 forms in binding vector(NO_SOURCE_FILE:1) Why doesn't if-let support any even amount of binding forms as let does? e.g. (if-let [x 1 y 2 z 3] (+ x y z) 0) ; = 6 (if-let [x 1 y nil z 3] (+ x y z) 0) ; = 0 Thanks! -- 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
Re: Clojure @ Prague?
What do you think guys about informal meeting at the weekend? On Monday, July 9, 2012 9:21:51 AM UTC+2, Zuzkins wrote: Hi guys, I, somehow, missed this thread but I am all up for clojure @ Prague On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Edward Tsech edts...@gmail.com wrote: HI Daniel, I'm interested in Clojure and I would like to meet some Clojurians in Prague too! Ed On Friday, June 29, 2012 12:21:58 PM UTC+2, Daniel Skarda wrote: Hi, are there fellow Clojurians from Prague, Czech Republic using Clojure to attack real problems? I started with Clojure about three months ago. At the beginning it was curious experiment, now it is full time engagement. And you know - programming can be fun again :) Would you like to meet for a beer and discuss Clojure, ClojureScript or Datomic? Cheers, Dan -- 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 -- :J -- 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
