On Mar 4, 2010, at 8:00 AM, Rich Hickey wrote:
>
>
> On Mar 4, 2:56 am, TimDaly wrote:
>> For the other groups that I subscribe to, the email subjects are
>> always prefixed with the group name, e.g.
>>
>> Re: [sage-devel] This is the mail subject
>>
>> This makes it possible to reliably grou
Hi,
On Mar 1, 2010, at 5:19 AM, Andrzej wrote:
What to do if we don't know which of the equation variables are
unknowns? Let's say that the user may choose whether to input "Rent"
and "Sell", or "Rent" and "opportunityCost". I can imagine writing
some code like this:
(defn opportunity-cost [o
Hi,
On Feb 22, 2010, at 9:39 AM, David Nolen wrote:
You also might want to pick a different strategy for parsing the
string instead of splitting the string immediately into 5000
parts.
Along those lines, just use a regexp sequence.
Thanks,
Johnny
--
You received this message because
Hi,
On Feb 22, 2010, at 2:20 AM, Meikel Brandmeyer wrote:
> First some fixes:
>
> (defmacro #^{:private true} use-private
> [ns sym]
> `(def ~(with-meta sym {:private true}) @(ns-resolve '~ns '~sym)))
Awesome!
>> This, however, doesn't work. The first ~sym macroexpands to (quote sym),
>> w
Hi,
On Feb 22, 2010, at 1:43 AM, Meikel Brandmeyer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Feb 22, 12:18 am, Johnny Kwan wrote:
>> I'm really new to Clojure, but I'm under the impression that reduce would
>> be better than apply, since I assume that apply would reify the entire
>
Hi All,
I'm trying to test some private functions using the Clojure convention of
placing tests in a separate test- namespace. Of course, you can't reference
private vars from other namespaces (please correct me if I'm wrong). Not
knowing anything at all about how stuff is interned in Clojure
I'm really new to Clojure, but I'm under the impression that reduce would be
better than apply, since I assume that apply would reify the entire sequence at
once, whereas reduce would consume the sequence one by one. Could someone more
familiar with the implementation weigh in on this?
On Feb
OK, I should have just tried passing in 'and at the REPL before posting. Of
course, it works. Is this the idiomatic way? I'm still curious about
short-circuiting.
On Feb 20, 2010, at 11:38 AM, Johnny Kwan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is a very basic question, but I can't
Hi,
This is a very basic question, but I can't find the answer anywhere. How do
you take the "and" or "or" of sequence? They are defined as macros and can't
be passed into "apply" or "reduce". Is there some reader macro character to
force it? Also, how does one write it so that it will shor
On Feb 14, 2010, at 8:58 AM, Laurent PETIT wrote:
> 2010/2/14 alux :
>> Hello Sean,
>>
>> thank you for the answer.
>>
>> I used letfn not for recursive swearing, but for the localness. I
>> thought the functions to be so special,
>> nobody else will use it, so I put it into conway-PM. Is there
On Feb 13, 2010, at 6:22 PM, Phil Hagelberg wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Richard Newman wrote:
>>> The above thread suggests defining *err* as a PrintWriter instead of
>>> as a Writer. Has this been patched, and is it official? If so, I'll
>>> patch clojure-swank to use PrintWrite
11 matches
Mail list logo
