Supplied-p parameter in clojure similar to lisp lambda lists
What is the commonly accepted technique for declaring/using 'supplied-p' type lambda list functionality in clojure? http://www.ai.mit.edu/projects/iiip/doc/CommonLISP/HyperSpec/Body/sec_3-4-1.html I have some clojure functions with a large number of keywords and various defaults, I want to know if a keyword was specified by the caller (rather than defaulted) in some cases. Certainly I could implement my own destructuring macros that did this, but I'd like to avoid reinventing a wheel here if I can, and also to know the idiomatic clojure way to do it. Thanks for any tips. -- 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: Supplied-p parameter in clojure similar to lisp lambda lists
If you destructure the parameters like this:
(defn f [& {:as a-map}] ...)
You can use map primitives on a-map. But you can also supply defaults here.
On Jun 20, 2014 2:14 PM, "Dave Tenny" wrote:
> What is the commonly accepted technique for declaring/using 'supplied-p'
> type lambda list functionality in clojure?
>
>
> http://www.ai.mit.edu/projects/iiip/doc/CommonLISP/HyperSpec/Body/sec_3-4-1.html
>
>
> I have some clojure functions with a large number of keywords and various
> defaults, I want to know if a keyword was specified by the caller (rather
> than defaulted) in some cases.
>
> Certainly I could implement my own destructuring macros that did this, but
> I'd like to avoid reinventing a wheel here if I can, and also to know the
> idiomatic clojure way to do it.
>
> Thanks for any tips.
>
>
> --
> 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: Supplied-p parameter in clojure similar to lisp lambda lists
Well, it took me a while to perhaps get what you were telling me here.
In my case I I had something like
(defn foo [ & {:keys [bar ... more keys ...] :or {bar 1}} ] ...)
and I wanted to know whether the user had explicilty invoked foo with :bar.
What wasn't clear to me was that :as solved this problem.
Reading http://clojure.org/special_forms#Special Forms--Binding Forms
(Destructuring)-Map binding destructuring
I guess I can see that it's telling me :as shows things that weren't in the
init-form, but that's with hindsight.
So, to emulated common lisp 'supplied-p' semantics, you can check the :as
form, which will **not**
contain :or values for keywords.
E.g.
user> (defn bar [ & {:keys [baz] :or {baz 'baz} :as all-keys} ] (println
baz all-keys))
#'user/bar
user> (bar :bof 1)
baz {:bof 1}
nil
And not that the all-keys form does not show a binding for baz, and that's
what I wanted.
Just fyi in case anybody searches topics for 'supplied-p' again.
On Saturday, June 21, 2014 7:22:13 PM UTC-4, Jason Felice wrote:
>
> If you destructure the parameters like this:
> (defn f [& {:as a-map}] ...)
>
> You can use map primitives on a-map. But you can also supply defaults
> here.
> On Jun 20, 2014 2:14 PM, "Dave Tenny" >
> wrote:
>
>> What is the commonly accepted technique for declaring/using 'supplied-p'
>> type lambda list functionality in clojure?
>>
>>
>> http://www.ai.mit.edu/projects/iiip/doc/CommonLISP/HyperSpec/Body/sec_3-4-1.html
>>
>>
>> I have some clojure functions with a large number of keywords and various
>> defaults, I want to know if a keyword was specified by the caller (rather
>> than defaulted) in some cases.
>>
>> Certainly I could implement my own destructuring macros that did this,
>> but I'd like to avoid reinventing a wheel here if I can, and also to know
>> the idiomatic clojure way to do it.
>>
>> Thanks for any tips.
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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 unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to clojure+u...@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: Supplied-p parameter in clojure similar to lisp lambda lists
I think that adding a :p option to destructuring would be great:
(let [ {:keys [a b c] :p {a a-p}} params]
(if a-p
(println a)
(println "a is not exists.")))
2014-08-17 20:05 GMT+08:00 Dave Tenny :
> Well, it took me a while to perhaps get what you were telling me here.
>
> In my case I I had something like
>
> (defn foo [ & {:keys [bar ... more keys ...] :or {bar 1}} ] ...)
>
> and I wanted to know whether the user had explicilty invoked foo with :bar.
>
> What wasn't clear to me was that :as solved this problem.
> Reading http://clojure.org/special_forms#Special Forms--Binding Forms
> (Destructuring)-Map binding destructuring
> I guess I can see that it's telling me :as shows things that weren't in
> the init-form, but that's with hindsight.
>
> So, to emulated common lisp 'supplied-p' semantics, you can check the :as
> form, which will **not**
> contain :or values for keywords.
>
> E.g.
>
> user> (defn bar [ & {:keys [baz] :or {baz 'baz} :as all-keys} ] (println
> baz all-keys))
> #'user/bar
> user> (bar :bof 1)
> baz {:bof 1}
> nil
>
> And not that the all-keys form does not show a binding for baz, and that's
> what I wanted.
>
> Just fyi in case anybody searches topics for 'supplied-p' again.
>
>
> On Saturday, June 21, 2014 7:22:13 PM UTC-4, Jason Felice wrote:
>
>> If you destructure the parameters like this:
>> (defn f [& {:as a-map}] ...)
>>
>> You can use map primitives on a-map. But you can also supply defaults
>> here.
>> On Jun 20, 2014 2:14 PM, "Dave Tenny" wrote:
>>
>>> What is the commonly accepted technique for declaring/using
>>> 'supplied-p' type lambda list functionality in clojure?
>>>
>>> http://www.ai.mit.edu/projects/iiip/doc/CommonLISP/
>>> HyperSpec/Body/sec_3-4-1.html
>>>
>>>
>>> I have some clojure functions with a large number of keywords and
>>> various defaults, I want to know if a keyword was specified by the caller
>>> (rather than defaulted) in some cases.
>>>
>>> Certainly I could implement my own destructuring macros that did this,
>>> but I'd like to avoid reinventing a wheel here if I can, and also to know
>>> the idiomatic clojure way to do it.
>>>
>>> Thanks for any tips.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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 unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> an email to clojure+u...@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.
>
--
庄晓丹
Email:killme2...@gmail.com xzhu...@avos.com
Site: http://fnil.net
Twitter: @killme2008
--
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: Supplied-p parameter in clojure similar to lisp lambda lists
I created a ticket http://dev.clojure.org/jira/browse/CLJ-1508
2014-08-18 11:02 GMT+08:00 dennis zhuang :
> I think that adding a :p option to destructuring would be great:
>
> (let [ {:keys [a b c] :p {a a-p}} params]
> (if a-p
> (println a)
> (println "a is not exists.")))
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 2014-08-17 20:05 GMT+08:00 Dave Tenny :
>
> Well, it took me a while to perhaps get what you were telling me here.
>>
>> In my case I I had something like
>>
>> (defn foo [ & {:keys [bar ... more keys ...] :or {bar 1}} ] ...)
>>
>> and I wanted to know whether the user had explicilty invoked foo with
>> :bar.
>>
>> What wasn't clear to me was that :as solved this problem.
>> Reading http://clojure.org/special_forms#Special Forms--Binding Forms
>> (Destructuring)-Map binding destructuring
>> I guess I can see that it's telling me :as shows things that weren't in
>> the init-form, but that's with hindsight.
>>
>> So, to emulated common lisp 'supplied-p' semantics, you can check the :as
>> form, which will **not**
>> contain :or values for keywords.
>>
>> E.g.
>>
>> user> (defn bar [ & {:keys [baz] :or {baz 'baz} :as all-keys} ] (println
>> baz all-keys))
>> #'user/bar
>> user> (bar :bof 1)
>> baz {:bof 1}
>> nil
>>
>> And not that the all-keys form does not show a binding for baz, and
>> that's what I wanted.
>>
>> Just fyi in case anybody searches topics for 'supplied-p' again.
>>
>>
>> On Saturday, June 21, 2014 7:22:13 PM UTC-4, Jason Felice wrote:
>>
>>> If you destructure the parameters like this:
>>> (defn f [& {:as a-map}] ...)
>>>
>>> You can use map primitives on a-map. But you can also supply defaults
>>> here.
>>> On Jun 20, 2014 2:14 PM, "Dave Tenny" wrote:
>>>
What is the commonly accepted technique for declaring/using
'supplied-p' type lambda list functionality in clojure?
http://www.ai.mit.edu/projects/iiip/doc/CommonLISP/
HyperSpec/Body/sec_3-4-1.html
I have some clojure functions with a large number of keywords and
various defaults, I want to know if a keyword was specified by the caller
(rather than defaulted) in some cases.
Certainly I could implement my own destructuring macros that did this,
but I'd like to avoid reinventing a wheel here if I can, and also to know
the idiomatic clojure way to do it.
Thanks for any tips.
--
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 unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to clojure+u...@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.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> 庄晓丹
> Email:killme2...@gmail.com xzhu...@avos.com
> Site: http://fnil.net
> Twitter: @killme2008
>
>
>
--
庄晓丹
Email:killme2...@gmail.com xzhu...@avos.com
Site: http://fnil.net
Twitter: @killme2008
--
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: Supplied-p parameter in clojure similar to lisp lambda lists
I don't think that a :p feature is necessary, since all you need to do to
emulate it is a
(:baz all-keys) to know if the user explicitly specified it. I.e. I think
the capability is already present in adequate form but the documentation on
map destructuring could be improved.
On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 11:02 PM, dennis zhuang
wrote:
> I think that adding a :p option to destructuring would be great:
>
> (let [ {:keys [a b c] :p {a a-p}} params]
> (if a-p
> (println a)
> (println "a is not exists.")))
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 2014-08-17 20:05 GMT+08:00 Dave Tenny :
>
>> Well, it took me a while to perhaps get what you were telling me here.
>>
>> In my case I I had something like
>>
>> (defn foo [ & {:keys [bar ... more keys ...] :or {bar 1}} ] ...)
>>
>> and I wanted to know whether the user had explicilty invoked foo with
>> :bar.
>>
>> What wasn't clear to me was that :as solved this problem.
>> Reading http://clojure.org/special_forms#Special Forms--Binding Forms
>> (Destructuring)-Map binding destructuring
>> I guess I can see that it's telling me :as shows things that weren't in
>> the init-form, but that's with hindsight.
>>
>> So, to emulated common lisp 'supplied-p' semantics, you can check the :as
>> form, which will **not**
>> contain :or values for keywords.
>>
>> E.g.
>>
>> user> (defn bar [ & {:keys [baz] :or {baz 'baz} :as all-keys} ] (println
>> baz all-keys))
>> #'user/bar
>> user> (bar :bof 1)
>> baz {:bof 1}
>> nil
>>
>> And not that the all-keys form does not show a binding for baz, and
>> that's what I wanted.
>>
>> Just fyi in case anybody searches topics for 'supplied-p' again.
>>
>>
>> On Saturday, June 21, 2014 7:22:13 PM UTC-4, Jason Felice wrote:
>>
>>> If you destructure the parameters like this:
>>> (defn f [& {:as a-map}] ...)
>>>
>>> You can use map primitives on a-map. But you can also supply defaults
>>> here.
>>> On Jun 20, 2014 2:14 PM, "Dave Tenny" wrote:
>>>
What is the commonly accepted technique for declaring/using
'supplied-p' type lambda list functionality in clojure?
http://www.ai.mit.edu/projects/iiip/doc/CommonLISP/
HyperSpec/Body/sec_3-4-1.html
I have some clojure functions with a large number of keywords and
various defaults, I want to know if a keyword was specified by the caller
(rather than defaulted) in some cases.
Certainly I could implement my own destructuring macros that did this,
but I'd like to avoid reinventing a wheel here if I can, and also to know
the idiomatic clojure way to do it.
Thanks for any tips.
--
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 unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to clojure+u...@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.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> 庄晓丹
> Email:killme2...@gmail.com xzhu...@avos.com
> Site: http://fnil.net
> Twitter: @killme2008
>
>
> --
> 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 a topic in the
> Google Groups "Clojure" group.
> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/clojure/jWc51JOkvsA/unsubscribe.
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
> clojure+un
Re: Supplied-p parameter in clojure similar to lisp lambda lists
Yep, it's an optional syntax sugar.
Indeed, you should use (contains? all-keys :baz) to check if :baz is
present in options. If :baz is present but it's value is nil,then (:baz
all-keys) returns nil too.
2014-08-18 18:57 GMT+08:00 Dave Tenny :
> I don't think that a :p feature is necessary, since all you need to do to
> emulate it is a
> (:baz all-keys) to know if the user explicitly specified it. I.e. I think
> the capability is already present in adequate form but the documentation on
> map destructuring could be improved.
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 11:02 PM, dennis zhuang
> wrote:
>
>> I think that adding a :p option to destructuring would be great:
>>
>> (let [ {:keys [a b c] :p {a a-p}} params]
>> (if a-p
>> (println a)
>> (println "a is not exists.")))
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2014-08-17 20:05 GMT+08:00 Dave Tenny :
>>
>>> Well, it took me a while to perhaps get what you were telling me here.
>>>
>>> In my case I I had something like
>>>
>>> (defn foo [ & {:keys [bar ... more keys ...] :or {bar 1}} ] ...)
>>>
>>> and I wanted to know whether the user had explicilty invoked foo with
>>> :bar.
>>>
>>> What wasn't clear to me was that :as solved this problem.
>>> Reading http://clojure.org/special_forms#Special Forms--Binding Forms
>>> (Destructuring)-Map binding destructuring
>>> I guess I can see that it's telling me :as shows things that weren't in
>>> the init-form, but that's with hindsight.
>>>
>>> So, to emulated common lisp 'supplied-p' semantics, you can check the
>>> :as form, which will **not**
>>> contain :or values for keywords.
>>>
>>> E.g.
>>>
>>> user> (defn bar [ & {:keys [baz] :or {baz 'baz} :as all-keys} ] (println
>>> baz all-keys))
>>> #'user/bar
>>> user> (bar :bof 1)
>>> baz {:bof 1}
>>> nil
>>>
>>> And not that the all-keys form does not show a binding for baz, and
>>> that's what I wanted.
>>>
>>> Just fyi in case anybody searches topics for 'supplied-p' again.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Saturday, June 21, 2014 7:22:13 PM UTC-4, Jason Felice wrote:
>>>
If you destructure the parameters like this:
(defn f [& {:as a-map}] ...)
You can use map primitives on a-map. But you can also supply defaults
here.
On Jun 20, 2014 2:14 PM, "Dave Tenny" wrote:
> What is the commonly accepted technique for declaring/using
> 'supplied-p' type lambda list functionality in clojure?
>
> http://www.ai.mit.edu/projects/iiip/doc/CommonLISP/
> HyperSpec/Body/sec_3-4-1.html
>
>
> I have some clojure functions with a large number of keywords and
> various defaults, I want to know if a keyword was specified by the caller
> (rather than defaulted) in some cases.
>
> Certainly I could implement my own destructuring macros that did this,
> but I'd like to avoid reinventing a wheel here if I can, and also to know
> the idiomatic clojure way to do it.
>
> Thanks for any tips.
>
>
> --
> 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 unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to clojure+u...@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.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 庄晓丹
>> Email:killme2...@gmail.com xzhu...@avos.com
>> Site: http://fnil.net
>> Twitter: @killme2008
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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...@googlegro
