It would be nice if clojure.core/conj had a unary implementation
([coll] coll)
The motivating use case is when one is conjoining sequences of
items to a collection all at once:
(apply conj coll seqable)
such as (apply conj #{1 2 3} [2 4 6 8 10]).
Currently (1.4.0), this will rais
There is never a reason to write (apply conj ...). Instead, use `into`,
which does the same thing but faster and with fewer characters.
On Saturday, November 3, 2012 3:27:24 PM UTC-7, CGAT wrote:
>
> It would be nice if clojure.core/conj had a unary implementation
>
>([coll] coll)
>
> Th
There might be a reason to write (apply f coll seqable) in a situation
in which f might be conj, though.
On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 4:25 PM, Alan Malloy wrote:
> There is never a reason to write (apply conj ...). Instead, use `into`,
> which does the same thing but faster and with fewer characters.
>
That's a good point Alan, and I should have mentioned into.
But this came up for me in a situation relevant to Ben's' point.
I was adding or removing a computed sequence of elements of a set based on
some other
input and was using either conj or disj depending on that input, with apply.
It worked
>
> It would be nice if clojure.core/conj had a unary implementation
>
>([coll] coll)
>
I support this. Reasons:
1. It makes sense, adding nothing to something should give back the
something.
2. It's consistent with disj as mentioned.
3. Supporting edge cases like this can make some algorithm
On Sunday, November 4, 2012 12:43:22 AM UTC+1, Ben wrote:
> There might be a reason to write (apply f coll seqable) in a situation
> in which f might be conj, though.
>
One may use (reduce f coll seqable) instead, if that makes sense
semantically in that context.
--
You received this message
I created CLJ-1103 and attached a patch that makes this change, as well as
related changes to conj! assoc assoc! and dissoc! (dissoc, disj and disj!
already handled these cases).
http://dev.clojure.org/jira/browse/CLJ-1103
Andy
On Nov 4, 2012, at 5:52 AM, Jonathan Fischer Friberg wrote:
> It
+1
2012年11月4日日曜日 7時27分24秒 UTC+9 CGAT:
>
> It would be nice if clojure.core/conj had a unary implementation
>
>([coll] coll)
>
> The motivating use case is when one is conjoining sequences of
> items to a collection all at once:
>
>(apply conj coll seqable)
>
> such as (apply conj #
