On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 5:17 PM, Hugh Winkler hwink...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 1:59 PM, David Nolen dnolen.li...@gmail.com wrote:
Maps aren't ordered so this isn't a good idea anyway.
It's a good idea if you have a sorted map. My example should have used
sorted-map.
The
i've noticed a pattern in explanations in clojure that interface and runtime
are related. Is that the point being made here? Make expensive things hard
or at least explicit?
Maybe instead of nth, since that causes controversy,
call it find-nth or something?
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 12:58
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 5:17 PM, Hugh Winkler hwink...@gmail.com wrote
Thanks! I think 'nth ought to behave just like 'first and 'second,
don't you? If it's a good idea for 'first it's a good idea for 'nth.
It does seems like a reasonable behavior for sorted-set and sorted-map, but
what else
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 1:59 PM, David Nolen dnolen.li...@gmail.com wrote:
Maps aren't ordered so this isn't a good idea anyway.
It's a good idea if you have a sorted map. My example should have used
sorted-map.
The reason first/second work is because they call seq on the collection.
(key
