Sorted maps sort only on keys, sorry. I was going to suggest using
(sort-by frest foo) to at least get a sequence in the right order, but
it seems like sorting might be broken at the moment? Looks like this
response has turned into a bug report...
user= (sort [3 1 2])
Oh, nevermind. I hadn't switched my svn over to the Google Code
repository, so I was on 1162... up to 1185 and we're ok.
So yeah.
user= (sort-by frest {:a 2 :b 3 :c 1})
([:c 1] [:a 2] [:b 3])
On Dec 27, 12:50 pm, kwatford kwatf...@gmail.com wrote:
Sorted maps sort only on keys, sorry. I
I've been using assoc-in, get-in, etc, to work with nested maps, but I
recently needed a dissoc-in to free up unneeded indexes and such. I
didn't see one, so does this look about right?
(defn dissoc-in [m keys]
(if (= (count keys) 1)
(dissoc m (first keys))
(let [k (last keys)
I have the following Clojure code and I'm not sure why it's not working:
The short answer is: That's not Clojure code, it is Common Lisp code.
Longer answer: Despite having similar-looking syntax, the two are not
particularly related. Of the functions/macros you tried to use, I
think only and,
*agent* and a few others have recently been properly documented at
http://clojure.org/api
Unfortunately this isn't true for all of the 'standard' globals. *in*
and *out* don't have entries of their own, though they are mentioned
in the functions that use them, so a search within that page will
So I have some code that looks somewhat like:
(update-in node [:index :x] set/union #{:y})
This seems fine as long as there's already a set in the desired spot.
However, since update-in will kindly build the map structure for you
if it doesn't already exist, I figured it would be nice not to
Maps are functions of their keys because that's what maps are.
Keywords are functions of their maps because it is useful.
(def foo [{:name Bob, :age 20}, {:name Sue, :age 19}])
(sort-by :age foo)
(sort-by :name foo)
Note that sort-by doesn't specifically take a keyword or know what
maps are.
Here is where I am: If your function creates/returns only atoms or
fixed size collections, loop/recur is fine.
I don't think you should use the word 'atom' in the discussion in the
book. Lisp people will know what you mean, but Clojure's new 'atom'
reference type makes that usage confusing
Somewhat related, I noticed that the keyword function doesn't seem to
make any attempt at ensuring keywords are even readable.
user= (keyword (foo))
:(foo)
Is this intended?
On Nov 24, 9:26 am, Rich Hickey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 23, 9:09 am, James Reeves [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
