Re: 2 way transform in single definition ? unification ?
This does look good - I'll give it a whirl - thanks for the example :-)
Jules
On Monday, 13 July 2015 11:00:55 UTC+1, Jonathan Winandy wrote:
To me it's a very good option.
Given you example :
(./pull '[org.clojure/core.logic 0.8.10])
(ns yo (:refer-clojure :exclude [==]) (:use [clojure.core.logic]))
(defne a-to-b [x y]
([ {:a {:b b :c c}} [b [c]] ]))
(run* [a]
(a-to-b a [1 [2]]))
;#= ({:a {:b 1, :c 2}})
On 13 July 2015 at 11:47, Gary Verhaegen gary.ve...@gmail.com
javascript: wrote:
I have not used it. I'm mentioning it because you mentioned unification
and prolog and because you basically want a two-way function, which is what
was touted as the ideal use-case for core.logic when it was heavily
discussed on this list a few months (years?) ago.
I'm not aware of the details of the performance tradeoffs, though. I
imagine it would be slower than writing both functions by hand, but I have
no idea how much.
On Monday, 13 July 2015, Jules jules@gmail.com javascript: wrote:
I haven't.
Are you just suggesting it because I mentioned unification, or have you
used it and know that it might be a good fit ?
Thanks,
Jules
On Monday, 13 July 2015 10:37:55 UTC+1, Gary Verhaegen wrote:
Have you already looked at core.logic?
On Monday, 13 July 2015, craig worrall craig@transacumen.com
wrote:
You may have already discounted Java versions, but just in case ...
http://www.javacodegeeks.com/2013/10/java-object-to-object-mapper.html
Craig
On Monday, July 13, 2015 at 3:53:19 AM UTC+10, Jules wrote:
Guys,
I have an external and an internal data representation.
I need to define transforms both ways.
Both models are structured.
A pair of in/out functions might look like:
(fn [{{b :b c c:} :a}] [b [c]])
(fn [[b [c]] {:a {:b b :c c}})
I just typed that OTTOMH so please forgive any mistakes.
I have about 50 of these to define and maintain and I may have
further representations to map to in the future.
My question - Is there a library that will allow me to define the
relationship between the two representations declaratively and then
generate the transform functions from that single src.
Ideally it would allow me to extend it to construct/destructure e.g.
joda-time class instances etc as some of my internal rep uses these.
It feels a bit like unification in PROLOG...
Looking forward to hearing your ideas.
regards,
Jules
--
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/d/optout.
--
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/d/optout.
--
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
javascript:
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 unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to clojure+u...@googlegroups.com javascript:.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
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
Re: 2 way transform in single definition ? unification ?
Have you already looked at core.logic?
On Monday, 13 July 2015, craig worrall craig.worr...@transacumen.com
wrote:
You may have already discounted Java versions, but just in case ...
http://www.javacodegeeks.com/2013/10/java-object-to-object-mapper.html
Craig
On Monday, July 13, 2015 at 3:53:19 AM UTC+10, Jules wrote:
Guys,
I have an external and an internal data representation.
I need to define transforms both ways.
Both models are structured.
A pair of in/out functions might look like:
(fn [{{b :b c c:} :a}] [b [c]])
(fn [[b [c]] {:a {:b b :c c}})
I just typed that OTTOMH so please forgive any mistakes.
I have about 50 of these to define and maintain and I may have further
representations to map to in the future.
My question - Is there a library that will allow me to define the
relationship between the two representations declaratively and then
generate the transform functions from that single src.
Ideally it would allow me to extend it to construct/destructure e.g.
joda-time class instances etc as some of my internal rep uses these.
It feels a bit like unification in PROLOG...
Looking forward to hearing your ideas.
regards,
Jules
--
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
javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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
javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','clojure%2bunsubscr...@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
javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','clojure%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com');.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
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/d/optout.
Re: 2 way transform in single definition ? unification ?
I haven't.
Are you just suggesting it because I mentioned unification, or have you
used it and know that it might be a good fit ?
Thanks,
Jules
On Monday, 13 July 2015 10:37:55 UTC+1, Gary Verhaegen wrote:
Have you already looked at core.logic?
On Monday, 13 July 2015, craig worrall craig@transacumen.com
javascript: wrote:
You may have already discounted Java versions, but just in case ...
http://www.javacodegeeks.com/2013/10/java-object-to-object-mapper.html
Craig
On Monday, July 13, 2015 at 3:53:19 AM UTC+10, Jules wrote:
Guys,
I have an external and an internal data representation.
I need to define transforms both ways.
Both models are structured.
A pair of in/out functions might look like:
(fn [{{b :b c c:} :a}] [b [c]])
(fn [[b [c]] {:a {:b b :c c}})
I just typed that OTTOMH so please forgive any mistakes.
I have about 50 of these to define and maintain and I may have further
representations to map to in the future.
My question - Is there a library that will allow me to define the
relationship between the two representations declaratively and then
generate the transform functions from that single src.
Ideally it would allow me to extend it to construct/destructure e.g.
joda-time class instances etc as some of my internal rep uses these.
It feels a bit like unification in PROLOG...
Looking forward to hearing your ideas.
regards,
Jules
--
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/d/optout.
--
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/d/optout.
Re: 2 way transform in single definition ? unification ?
To me it's a very good option.
Given you example :
(./pull '[org.clojure/core.logic 0.8.10])
(ns yo (:refer-clojure :exclude [==]) (:use [clojure.core.logic]))
(defne a-to-b [x y]
([ {:a {:b b :c c}} [b [c]] ]))
(run* [a]
(a-to-b a [1 [2]]))
;#= ({:a {:b 1, :c 2}})
On 13 July 2015 at 11:47, Gary Verhaegen gary.verhae...@gmail.com wrote:
I have not used it. I'm mentioning it because you mentioned unification
and prolog and because you basically want a two-way function, which is what
was touted as the ideal use-case for core.logic when it was heavily
discussed on this list a few months (years?) ago.
I'm not aware of the details of the performance tradeoffs, though. I
imagine it would be slower than writing both functions by hand, but I have
no idea how much.
On Monday, 13 July 2015, Jules jules.gosn...@gmail.com wrote:
I haven't.
Are you just suggesting it because I mentioned unification, or have you
used it and know that it might be a good fit ?
Thanks,
Jules
On Monday, 13 July 2015 10:37:55 UTC+1, Gary Verhaegen wrote:
Have you already looked at core.logic?
On Monday, 13 July 2015, craig worrall craig@transacumen.com
wrote:
You may have already discounted Java versions, but just in case ...
http://www.javacodegeeks.com/2013/10/java-object-to-object-mapper.html
Craig
On Monday, July 13, 2015 at 3:53:19 AM UTC+10, Jules wrote:
Guys,
I have an external and an internal data representation.
I need to define transforms both ways.
Both models are structured.
A pair of in/out functions might look like:
(fn [{{b :b c c:} :a}] [b [c]])
(fn [[b [c]] {:a {:b b :c c}})
I just typed that OTTOMH so please forgive any mistakes.
I have about 50 of these to define and maintain and I may have further
representations to map to in the future.
My question - Is there a library that will allow me to define the
relationship between the two representations declaratively and then
generate the transform functions from that single src.
Ideally it would allow me to extend it to construct/destructure e.g.
joda-time class instances etc as some of my internal rep uses these.
It feels a bit like unification in PROLOG...
Looking forward to hearing your ideas.
regards,
Jules
--
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/d/optout.
--
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/d/optout.
--
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/d/optout.
--
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
Re: 2 way transform in single definition ? unification ?
I was hoping for something in idiomatic Clojure - but I'll take a look
thanks.
Jules
On Monday, 13 July 2015 04:45:00 UTC+1, craig worrall wrote:
You may have already discounted Java versions, but just in case ...
http://www.javacodegeeks.com/2013/10/java-object-to-object-mapper.html
Craig
On Monday, July 13, 2015 at 3:53:19 AM UTC+10, Jules wrote:
Guys,
I have an external and an internal data representation.
I need to define transforms both ways.
Both models are structured.
A pair of in/out functions might look like:
(fn [{{b :b c c:} :a}] [b [c]])
(fn [[b [c]] {:a {:b b :c c}})
I just typed that OTTOMH so please forgive any mistakes.
I have about 50 of these to define and maintain and I may have further
representations to map to in the future.
My question - Is there a library that will allow me to define the
relationship between the two representations declaratively and then
generate the transform functions from that single src.
Ideally it would allow me to extend it to construct/destructure e.g.
joda-time class instances etc as some of my internal rep uses these.
It feels a bit like unification in PROLOG...
Looking forward to hearing your ideas.
regards,
Jules
--
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/d/optout.
Re: 2 way transform in single definition ? unification ?
I have not used it. I'm mentioning it because you mentioned unification and
prolog and because you basically want a two-way function, which is what was
touted as the ideal use-case for core.logic when it was heavily discussed
on this list a few months (years?) ago.
I'm not aware of the details of the performance tradeoffs, though. I
imagine it would be slower than writing both functions by hand, but I have
no idea how much.
On Monday, 13 July 2015, Jules jules.gosn...@gmail.com wrote:
I haven't.
Are you just suggesting it because I mentioned unification, or have you
used it and know that it might be a good fit ?
Thanks,
Jules
On Monday, 13 July 2015 10:37:55 UTC+1, Gary Verhaegen wrote:
Have you already looked at core.logic?
On Monday, 13 July 2015, craig worrall craig@transacumen.com wrote:
You may have already discounted Java versions, but just in case ...
http://www.javacodegeeks.com/2013/10/java-object-to-object-mapper.html
Craig
On Monday, July 13, 2015 at 3:53:19 AM UTC+10, Jules wrote:
Guys,
I have an external and an internal data representation.
I need to define transforms both ways.
Both models are structured.
A pair of in/out functions might look like:
(fn [{{b :b c c:} :a}] [b [c]])
(fn [[b [c]] {:a {:b b :c c}})
I just typed that OTTOMH so please forgive any mistakes.
I have about 50 of these to define and maintain and I may have further
representations to map to in the future.
My question - Is there a library that will allow me to define the
relationship between the two representations declaratively and then
generate the transform functions from that single src.
Ideally it would allow me to extend it to construct/destructure e.g.
joda-time class instances etc as some of my internal rep uses these.
It feels a bit like unification in PROLOG...
Looking forward to hearing your ideas.
regards,
Jules
--
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/d/optout.
--
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
javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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
javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','clojure%2bunsubscr...@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
javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','clojure%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com');.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
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/d/optout.
Re: 2 way transform in single definition ? unification ?
You may have already discounted Java versions, but just in case ...
http://www.javacodegeeks.com/2013/10/java-object-to-object-mapper.html
Craig
On Monday, July 13, 2015 at 3:53:19 AM UTC+10, Jules wrote:
Guys,
I have an external and an internal data representation.
I need to define transforms both ways.
Both models are structured.
A pair of in/out functions might look like:
(fn [{{b :b c c:} :a}] [b [c]])
(fn [[b [c]] {:a {:b b :c c}})
I just typed that OTTOMH so please forgive any mistakes.
I have about 50 of these to define and maintain and I may have further
representations to map to in the future.
My question - Is there a library that will allow me to define the
relationship between the two representations declaratively and then
generate the transform functions from that single src.
Ideally it would allow me to extend it to construct/destructure e.g.
joda-time class instances etc as some of my internal rep uses these.
It feels a bit like unification in PROLOG...
Looking forward to hearing your ideas.
regards,
Jules
--
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/d/optout.
