On Jun 19, 11:13 am, Chouser wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 3:46 AM, Christophe Grand
> wrote:
>
> > I would further your reasoning on tolerance: it depends on whether the key,
> > the map or both are variable.
> > (key map) is safe as long as you know that key is a symbol or a keyword.
> >
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 3:46 AM, Christophe Grand wrote:
>
> I would further your reasoning on tolerance: it depends on whether the key,
> the map or both are variable.
> (key map) is safe as long as you know that key is a symbol or a keyword.
> (map key) is safe as long as you know that map will
Hi,
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 1:30 AM, Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
> I have code that gets passed a map (actually a struct-map), should I
>
> (my-map :my-key)
> or
> (:my-key my-map)
>
> I'm beginning to gravitate towards the latter, as it is more tolerant of
> the map being nil.
I would further y
I always use (map key), because it's the most likely to fail if "map"
is not what I think it is. This helps avoid some particularly hard to
find bugs.
-Patrick
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 6:30 PM, Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
> I have code that gets passed a map (actually a struct-map), should I
>
> (my-map :my-key)
> or
> (:my-key my-map)
>
> I'm beginning to gravitate towards the latter, as it is more tolerant of
> the map being nil.
>
I prefer the (map key)
I like the map-key pattern, especially inside a function.
(fn [my-var]
({"A" 1 :b "one"} my-var))
In this example, the my-var works properly when passed a string.
(fn [my-var]
(my-var {"A" 1 :b "one"}))
The second example breaks when passed a string.
On Jun 18, 8:37 pm, kkw wrote:
> (my
(my-map :my-key) has felt more natural to me, and I suspect it's
because it feels more OO to me (for better or worse). I hadn't
considered nil-map tolerance/robustness before, so I'd be quite happy
to change my mind on new work I write with maps.
Kev
On Jun 19, 10:13 am, "J. McConnell" wrote:
>
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 7:30 PM, Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
>
> I have code that gets passed a map (actually a struct-map), should I
>
> (my-map :my-key)
> or
> (:my-key my-map)
>
> I'm beginning to gravitate towards the latter, as it is more tolerant of the
> map being nil.
I tend to prefer the
I have code that gets passed a map (actually a struct-map), should I
(my-map :my-key)
or
(:my-key my-map)
I'm beginning to gravitate towards the latter, as it is more tolerant of the
map being nil.
--
Howard M. Lewis Ship
Creator of Apache Tapestry
Director of Open Source Technology at Formos
