Hi Ambrose,
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 12:22 AM, Ambrose Bonnaire-Sergeant
wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Tim Visher wrote:
>>
>>
>> 2. While I would very much expect the type test (coll? seq?) to return
>> false on a string, I would _not_ expect the capability test
>> (sequential?) to re
On Jun 8, 2012, at 2:21 AM, Cédric Pineau wrote:
>
> 2012/6/8 Cédric Pineau
>
> 2012/6/8 Ambrose Bonnaire-Sergeant
> No. I assume you mean seqable.
>
> If it did exist, it would look something like:
>
> Is there a simple test for sequable?
>
> Oh ok, I don't get the difference between seq
On Jun 8, 2012 3:18 AM, "Cédric Pineau" wrote:
> (defn seqable?
More modernly, this function can be found in core.incubator.
--
Stephen Compall
Greetings from sunny Appleton!
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, s
2012/6/8 Cédric Pineau
>
> 2012/6/8 Ambrose Bonnaire-Sergeant
>
>> No. I assume you mean seqable.
>>
>> If it did exist, it would look something like:
>>
>> Is there a simple test for sequable?
>
>
> Oh ok, I don't get the difference between seq and seqable..
>
>
I think I got it :
(seqable? a)
2012/6/8 Ambrose Bonnaire-Sergeant
> No. I assume you mean seqable.
>
> If it did exist, it would look something like:
>
> Is there a simple test for sequable?
Oh ok, I don't get the difference between seq and seqable..
Btw, i found this (
https://github.com/richhickey/clojure-contrib/blob/9f4
t: Fr, 08 Jun 2012, 08:58:51 MESZ
Betreff: Re: why String is not a collection (of Character)
Hi Andy,
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 1:44 PM, Andy L wrote:
> On 06/07/2012 09:22 PM, Ambrose Bonnaire-Sergeant wrote:
>
>> Every Seqable is not Sequential.
>>
>> (sequential? {:a 1
Hi Andy,
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 1:44 PM, Andy L wrote:
> On 06/07/2012 09:22 PM, Ambrose Bonnaire-Sergeant wrote:
>
>> Every Seqable is not Sequential.
>>
>> (sequential? {:a 1}) => false
>>
>
> Is there a simple test for sequable?
No. I assume you mean seqable.
If it did exist, it would look
2012/6/8 Andy L
>
> Is there a simple test for sequable?
seq?
--
Cédric
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be pa
On 06/07/2012 09:22 PM, Ambrose Bonnaire-Sergeant wrote:
Every Seqable is not Sequential.
(sequential? {:a 1}) => false
Is there a simple test for sequable?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to cloju
Hi Tim,
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Tim Visher wrote:
>
> 2. While I would very much expect the type test (coll? seq?) to return
> false on a string, I would _not_ expect the capability test
> (sequential?) to return false, and it does for a String. Is this the
> expected behavior? I would
Hi Andy,
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Andy Coolware wrote:
> I was wondering cause we can do all awesome stuff like that:
>
> user=> (last "abc")
> \c
> user=> (first "abc")
> \a
> user=> (map (fn[z] (str z "-")) "abc")
> ("a-" "b-" "c-")
>
> but this renders false
>
> user=> (coll? "abc")
> f
Hi Andy,
Many collection functions call "seq" on their arguments, therefore
those expect a Seqable (or a String, Iterable, Array, java.util.Map etc.),
not an IPersistentCollection (which coll? tests for).
Working these things out can get subtle.
Thanks,
Ambrose
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 7:54 AM, A
I was wondering cause we can do all awesome stuff like that:
user=> (last "abc")
\c
user=> (first "abc")
\a
user=> (map (fn[z] (str z "-")) "abc")
("a-" "b-" "c-")
but this renders false
user=> (coll? "abc")
false
A.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups
On 7 June 2012 07:03, Andy Coolware wrote:
> So my questions is as in subject. I did a bit of research but could not find
> a good answer.
Because otherwise Clojure wouldn't be compatible with Java APIs. It
would also probably be slower than using the native String class.
- James
--
You receiv
How would that affect Java interop? It seems like it would make Clojure
strings incompatible with Java functions that take strings as arguments.
On Wednesday, June 6, 2012 11:03:11 PM UTC-7, Andy C wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> So my questions is as in subject. I did a bit of research but could not
> find
Hi,
So my questions is as in subject. I did a bit of research but could not
find a good answer.
Would appreciate an insight ...
(thank you 'Andy)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegro
16 matches
Mail list logo
