Re: Pattern of Succinctness
Using threading operators + anonymous functions sometimes yields more
succinct code than using HOF,
especially because 'partial' and 'comp' are such long names:
(comp count (partial filter nil?) (partial map foo))
#(->> % (map foo) (filter nil?) count)
On Sunday, August 12, 2012 7:35:16 PM UTC+2, Takahiro Hozumi wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I would like to know common technics that make code succinct.
>
> For example:
> (or (:b {:a 1}) 0)
> (:b {:a 1} 0)
>
> (if-not x 1 2)
> (if x 2 1)
>
> (filter #(not (nil? %)) coll)
> (filter identity coll) ;; nearly equal
>
> Please let me know any tips you found.
>
> Cheers,
> Takahiro.
>
--
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: Pattern of Succinctness
Should be (filter (comp not nil?) coll) On Sunday, August 12, 2012 9:44:11 PM UTC+2, Pierre-Henry Perret wrote: > > I prefer (filter (partial not nil?) coll) as a HOF > > Le dimanche 12 août 2012 20:46:59 UTC+2, rmarianski a écrit : >> >> On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 11:22:55AM -0700, Takahiro Hozumi wrote: >> > > (filter (partial not nil?) coll) >> > You mean (filter (comp not nil?) coll). >> > I'm not sure which is more readable, but thanks for Meikel and Alex, I >> now >> > prefer (remove nil? coll). >> >> remove is better in this case, but for posterity (comp not nil?) can be >> spelled as (complement nil?) >> >> Robert >> > -- 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: Pattern of Succinctness
This doesn't work. On Sunday, August 12, 2012 12:44:11 PM UTC-7, Pierre-Henry Perret wrote: > > I prefer (filter (partial not nil?) coll) as a HOF > > Le dimanche 12 août 2012 20:46:59 UTC+2, rmarianski a écrit : >> >> On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 11:22:55AM -0700, Takahiro Hozumi wrote: >> > > (filter (partial not nil?) coll) >> > You mean (filter (comp not nil?) coll). >> > I'm not sure which is more readable, but thanks for Meikel and Alex, I >> now >> > prefer (remove nil? coll). >> >> remove is better in this case, but for posterity (comp not nil?) can be >> spelled as (complement nil?) >> >> Robert >> > -- 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: Pattern of Succinctness
I prefer (filter (partial not nil?) coll) as a HOF Le dimanche 12 août 2012 20:46:59 UTC+2, rmarianski a écrit : > > On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 11:22:55AM -0700, Takahiro Hozumi wrote: > > > (filter (partial not nil?) coll) > > You mean (filter (comp not nil?) coll). > > I'm not sure which is more readable, but thanks for Meikel and Alex, I > now > > prefer (remove nil? coll). > > remove is better in this case, but for posterity (comp not nil?) can be > spelled as (complement nil?) > > Robert > -- 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: Pattern of Succinctness
On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 11:22:55AM -0700, Takahiro Hozumi wrote: > > (filter (partial not nil?) coll) > You mean (filter (comp not nil?) coll). > I'm not sure which is more readable, but thanks for Meikel and Alex, I now > prefer (remove nil? coll). remove is better in this case, but for posterity (comp not nil?) can be spelled as (complement nil?) Robert -- 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: Pattern of Succinctness
> (filter (partial not nil?) coll)
You mean (filter (comp not nil?) coll).
I'm not sure which is more readable, but thanks for Meikel and Alex, I now
prefer (remove nil? coll).
Thanks.
On Monday, August 13, 2012 2:38:23 AM UTC+9, Tamreen Khan (Scriptor) wrote:
>
> Is the last one considered generally more readable? I think the following
> is clearer while still not having as much noise as the first filter example:
>
> (filter (partial not nil?) coll)
>
> On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Takahiro Hozumi
>
> > wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> I would like to know common technics that make code succinct.
>>
>> For example:
>> (or (:b {:a 1}) 0)
>> (:b {:a 1} 0)
>>
>> (if-not x 1 2)
>> (if x 2 1)
>>
>> (filter #(not (nil? %)) coll)
>> (filter identity coll) ;; nearly equal
>>
>> Please let me know any tips you found.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Takahiro.
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> Groups "Clojure" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to clo...@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+u...@googlegroups.com
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
>
>
>
On Monday, August 13, 2012 2:38:23 AM UTC+9, Tamreen Khan (Scriptor) wrote:
>
> Is the last one considered generally more readable? I think the following
> is clearer while still not having as much noise as the first filter example:
>
> (filter (partial not nil?) coll)
>
> On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Takahiro Hozumi
>
> > wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> I would like to know common technics that make code succinct.
>>
>> For example:
>> (or (:b {:a 1}) 0)
>> (:b {:a 1} 0)
>>
>> (if-not x 1 2)
>> (if x 2 1)
>>
>> (filter #(not (nil? %)) coll)
>> (filter identity coll) ;; nearly equal
>>
>> Please let me know any tips you found.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Takahiro.
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> Groups "Clojure" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to clo...@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+u...@googlegroups.com
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
>
>
>
On Monday, August 13, 2012 2:38:23 AM UTC+9, Tamreen Khan (Scriptor) wrote:
>
> Is the last one considered generally more readable? I think the following
> is clearer while still not having as much noise as the first filter example:
>
> (filter (partial not nil?) coll)
>
> On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Takahiro Hozumi
>
> > wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> I would like to know common technics that make code succinct.
>>
>> For example:
>> (or (:b {:a 1}) 0)
>> (:b {:a 1} 0)
>>
>> (if-not x 1 2)
>> (if x 2 1)
>>
>> (filter #(not (nil? %)) coll)
>> (filter identity coll) ;; nearly equal
>>
>> Please let me know any tips you found.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Takahiro.
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> Groups "Clojure" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to clo...@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+u...@googlegroups.com
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
>
>
>
On Monday, August 13, 2012 2:38:23 AM UTC+9, Tamreen Khan (Scriptor) wrote:
>
> Is the last one considered generally more readable? I think the following
> is clearer while still not having as much noise as the first filter example:
>
> (filter (partial not nil?) coll)
>
> On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Takahiro Hozumi
>
> > wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> I would like to know common technics that make code succinct.
>>
>> For example:
>> (or (:b {:a 1}) 0)
>> (:b {:a 1} 0)
>>
>> (if-not x 1 2)
>> (if x 2 1)
>>
>> (filter #(not (nil? %)) coll)
>> (filter identity coll) ;; nearly equal
>>
>> Please let me know any tips you found.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Takahiro.
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> Groups "Clojure" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to clo...@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+u...@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 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
AW: Pattern of Succinctness
Hi,
pay attention:
(or (:a {:a false}) 0)
(:a {:a false} 0)
Same holds in case false is nil.
Using these "transformations" can easily introduce bugs, depending on the
context.
Kind regards
Meikel
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Takahiro Hozumi
An: clojure@googlegroups.com
Gesendet: So, 12 Aug 2012, 19:35:16 MESZ
Betreff: Pattern of Succinctness
Hi,
I would like to know common technics that make code succinct.
For example:
(or (:b {:a 1}) 0)
(:b {:a 1} 0)
(if-not x 1 2)
(if x 2 1)
(filter #(not (nil? %)) coll)
(filter identity coll) ;; nearly equal
Please let me know any tips you found.
Cheers,
Takahiro.
--
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 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: Pattern of Succinctness
(filter identity foos) and (filter #(not (nil? %)) foos) aren't equivalent. I prefer (remove nil? foos) Succint and direct. On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 11:13 PM, Bill Caputo wrote: > > On Aug 12, 2012, at 12:38 PM, Tamreen Khan wrote: > > (filter #(not (nil? %)) coll) >> (filter identity coll) ;; nearly equal >> > > Is the last one considered generally more readable? I think the following > is clearer while still not having as much noise as the first filter example: > > (filter (partial not nil?) coll) > > > To me it is. I read/heard somewhere that the identity check was idiomatic, > and started using it to the point where I find myself saying "filter > identity" as slang for keeping only the valid things. > > but that's just me (maybe)... don't know that it is generally considered > more readable (but I think so). > > > bill > > -- > 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 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
AW: Re: Pattern of Succinctness
Hi, in case you really want only nils filtered out: (filter (complement nil?) coll) or (remove nil? coll) Kind regards Meikel -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Bill Caputo An: Tamreen Khan Cc: clojure@googlegroups.com Gesendet: So, 12 Aug 2012, 19:43:58 MESZ Betreff: Re: Pattern of Succinctness On Aug 12, 2012, at 12:38 PM, Tamreen Khan wrote: > (filter #(not (nil? %)) coll) > (filter identity coll) ;; nearly equal > Is the last one considered generally more readable? I think the following is > clearer while still not having as much noise as the first filter example: > > (filter (partial not nil?) coll) To me it is. I read/heard somewhere that the identity check was idiomatic, and started using it to the point where I find myself saying "filter identity" as slang for keeping only the valid things. but that's just me (maybe)... don't know that it is generally considered more readable (but I think so). bill -- 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 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: Pattern of Succinctness
On Aug 12, 2012, at 12:38 PM, Tamreen Khan wrote: > (filter #(not (nil? %)) coll) > (filter identity coll) ;; nearly equal > Is the last one considered generally more readable? I think the following is > clearer while still not having as much noise as the first filter example: > > (filter (partial not nil?) coll) To me it is. I read/heard somewhere that the identity check was idiomatic, and started using it to the point where I find myself saying "filter identity" as slang for keeping only the valid things. but that's just me (maybe)... don't know that it is generally considered more readable (but I think so). bill -- 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: Pattern of Succinctness
Is the last one considered generally more readable? I think the following
is clearer while still not having as much noise as the first filter example:
(filter (partial not nil?) coll)
On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Takahiro Hozumi wrote:
> Hi,
> I would like to know common technics that make code succinct.
>
> For example:
> (or (:b {:a 1}) 0)
> (:b {:a 1} 0)
>
> (if-not x 1 2)
> (if x 2 1)
>
> (filter #(not (nil? %)) coll)
> (filter identity coll) ;; nearly equal
>
> Please let me know any tips you found.
>
> Cheers,
> Takahiro.
>
> --
> 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 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
Pattern of Succinctness
Hi,
I would like to know common technics that make code succinct.
For example:
(or (:b {:a 1}) 0)
(:b {:a 1} 0)
(if-not x 1 2)
(if x 2 1)
(filter #(not (nil? %)) coll)
(filter identity coll) ;; nearly equal
Please let me know any tips you found.
Cheers,
Takahiro.
--
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
