A company I did some work for adopted Ryver for the very reason that it was the
"free" alternative to Slack. While it did most of the job as the company's comm
bus, my experience was that they are a far cry from Slack. The integration
story is weak too. This crowd would not be happy with Ryver,
, Cam wrote:
I definitely like this version a little better. If you change the else
of the if to be just (list), it returns the empty list just as core/
flatten does. Mind if I update the ticket with this patch?
It's all yours. Really, just a slight change from your code anyway.
I wonder
I definitely like this version a little better. If you change the else
of the if to be just (list), it returns the empty list just as core/
flatten does. Mind if I update the ticket with this patch?
On Jul 14, 1:56 pm, miner stevemi...@gmail.com wrote:
I think it's worthwhile to have a faster
Hi Stuart,
Thanks for checking that out for me! Sorry for not realizing in the
first place.
I of course would be happy to submit a patch. Should I submit that
here or over on the assembla page?
On Jul 13, 9:10 am, Stuart Halloway stuart.hallo...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Cam,
Your tests aren't
it be worth promoting seqable? to core? In that case flatten
would handle pretty much everything you could throw at it like you'd
expect. I don't speak for everyone but when I saw sequential? I
assumed it would have the semantics that seqable? does.
On Jul 13, 11:04 am, Cam dlocpuw...@gmail.com wrote
, 11:57 am, Stuart Halloway stuart.hallo...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi Cam,
Please submit the modified version, and, if you want, create a separate
ticket for seqable?. I would like to review the latter separately.
Stu
Hi again, I modified my-flatten to return the empty list for sets and
maps
Another flatten thread! Sorry..
Hello all, before I realized there was a flatten in the master branch
(and before I looked at contrib) I wrote this pretty standard code:
(defn my-flatten [coll]
(lazy-seq
(when-let [coll (seq coll)]
(let [x (first coll)]
(if (sequential? x)
