2011/1/17 Stuart Sierra
> The problem with a "seq-able?" predicate is that the definition of what is
> seq-able is often context-dependent. `seq` works on Strings, but you
> probably don't want `flatten` to turn a String into a sequence of
> characters.
>
>
Good point. There is no static atom/lis
The problem with a "seq-able?" predicate is that the definition of what is
seq-able is often context-dependent. `seq` works on Strings, but you
probably don't want `flatten` to turn a String into a sequence of
characters.
-S
clojure.com
--
You received this message because you are subscribed
On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 6:22 AM, Jürgen Hötzel wrote:
> Hi,
> I came across this issue while implementing a lazy, efficient flatten that
> also uses the whole sequence abstraction (flatten java arrays).
> The problem with (seq x) is, that it will throw an Exception if called on
> something, th
Hi,
I came across this issue while implementing a lazy, efficient flatten that
also uses the whole sequence abstraction (flatten java arrays).
The problem with (seq x) is, that it will throw an Exception if called on
something, that cannot be coerced to sequence, so I just used sequencial?
lik