Re: Why the mix of dot syntax in clojure.core?
On Aug 22, 2:39 am, Legilimens wrote: > Would people be interested in a patch that replaces all of the older > static calls using . to the newer method using / ? I personally don't mind the leftovers of old syntax in core. However, the question of "why is it being used" comes up every couple of months, so it'd probably help newcomers if this were dealt with once and for all. +1 for your patch -- 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: Why the mix of dot syntax in clojure.core?
>
>
>Robert McIntyre Aug 21 03:58PM -0700
> ^<#12a9b8804b609349_digest_top>
>
>I am curious as to why first (and other functions) are defined in
>core as:
>
>(def
>^{:arglists
>'([coll])
>:doc "Returns the first item in the collection. Calls seq on
>its
>argument. If coll is nil, returns
>nil."
>:added
>"1.0"}
>first (fn first [coll] (. clojure.lang.RT (first coll
>
>instead of:
>
>(def
>^{:arglists '([coll])
>:doc "Returns the first item in the collection. Calls seq on its
>argument. If coll is nil, returns nil."
>:added "1.0"}
>first (fn first [coll] (clojure.lang.RT/first coll)))
>
>When the general consensus seems to be that the latter is more
>idiomatic/readable, especially for beginners?
>
>--Robert McIntyre
>
>
>
>
>Legilimens Aug 21 08:39PM -0400
> ^<#12a9b8804b609349_digest_top>
>
>Apparently this is indeed an older holdover and the . calls are slowly
>being replaced with / as people make edits according to chouser.
>
>Would people be interested in a patch that replaces all of the older
>static calls using . to the newer method using / ?
>
>--Robert McIntyre
>
>
>
>
> +1 for the patch -- Adam
--
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: Why the mix of dot syntax in clojure.core?
Apparently this is indeed an older holdover and the . calls are slowly
being replaced with / as people make edits according to chouser.
Would people be interested in a patch that replaces all of the older
static calls using . to the newer method using / ?
--Robert McIntyre
On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 6:58 PM, Robert McIntyre wrote:
> I am curious as to why first (and other functions) are defined in
> core as:
>
> (def
> ^{:arglists
> '([coll])
> :doc "Returns the first item in the collection. Calls seq on
> its
> argument. If coll is nil, returns
> nil."
> :added
> "1.0"}
> first (fn first [coll] (. clojure.lang.RT (first coll
>
> instead of:
>
> (def
> ^{:arglists '([coll])
> :doc "Returns the first item in the collection. Calls seq on its
> argument. If coll is nil, returns nil."
> :added "1.0"}
> first (fn first [coll] (clojure.lang.RT/first coll)))
>
> When the general consensus seems to be that the latter is more
> idiomatic/readable, especially for beginners?
>
> --Robert McIntyre
--
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
Why the mix of dot syntax in clojure.core?
I am curious as to why first (and other functions) are defined in
core as:
(def
^{:arglists
'([coll])
:doc "Returns the first item in the collection. Calls seq on
its
argument. If coll is nil, returns
nil."
:added
"1.0"}
first (fn first [coll] (. clojure.lang.RT (first coll
instead of:
(def
^{:arglists '([coll])
:doc "Returns the first item in the collection. Calls seq on its
argument. If coll is nil, returns nil."
:added "1.0"}
first (fn first [coll] (clojure.lang.RT/first coll)))
When the general consensus seems to be that the latter is more
idiomatic/readable, especially for beginners?
--Robert McIntyre
--
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
