Stuart,
This is a significant improvement over the original str-utils library,
and goes a long way towards making string processing kick ass in
Clojure. I like the fact that you made some design decisions for the
library, and did everything you could to stick with them. That makes
the library
Okay, I'm not sure what the correct thing do for the entire library
is, but I think I've got a convincing argument for some functions.
The following functions share a name with core functions
butlast
contains?
drop
get
partition
repeat
reverse
take
These functions should follow their
Hi,
Disclaimer: personal opinion following...
I'm sorry. I don't get the elegance of point-free style.
In mathematics f denotes the function, while f(x) denotes the value f
takes over x. This is actually a nice and easy to understand notation.
But why do I have to clutter my clojure code with
On Aug 20, 2009, at 2:29 AM, Meikel Brandmeyer wrote:
Hi,
Disclaimer: personal opinion following...
I think that's all we have when it comes to matters of style :-)
I'm sorry. I don't get the elegance of point-free style.
In mathematics f denotes the function, while f(x) denotes the
On Wed, 2009-08-19 at 23:29 -0700, Meikel Brandmeyer wrote:
Hi,
Disclaimer: personal opinion following...
I'm sorry. I don't get the elegance of point-free style.
In mathematics f denotes the function, while f(x) denotes the value f
takes over x. This is actually a nice and easy to
Seems like opinion is pretty evenly divided here. I'll leave the
library as-is for now, give it some time to see how things play out.
In the mean time, as a compromise, I've added str-utils2/partial,
which is like clojure.core/partial for functions that take their
primary argument first.
On Aug 20, 8:26 am, Stuart Sierra the.stuart.sie...@gmail.com wrote:
Seems like opinion is pretty evenly divided here. I'll leave the
library as-is for now, give it some time to see how things play out.
In the mean time, as a compromise, I've added str-utils2/partial,
which is like
On Aug 19, 2:16 pm, Sean Devlin francoisdev...@gmail.com wrote:
First, I would change the names of functions functions that collide
with core to str-take, str-drop, etc. It's just as much to type, and
it is safe to use these names. Also, it would make it easier for Rich
to promote the
Hey folks,
clojure.contrib.str-utils is one of the first libs I wrote, and it's
showing its age. I decided to try to start fresh, incorporating some
ideas discussed on the list. In general, I'm trying to provide an
efficient, functional API for string manipulation.
My new attempt is
I'm using str-utils2 for a couple of months now. Do not care about the
old library.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Vagif Verdivagif.ve...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm using str-utils2 for a couple of months now. Do not care about the
old library.
Me too. I think it would be helpful to have a recommended
namespace alias to help keep different people's code a bit
more uniform.
I
On Aug 19, 2009, at 2:22 PM, Chouser wrote:
I use (require '[clojure.contrib.str-utils2 :as str2]) for
now and would recommend just 'str' if the lib name changes.
Except, of course, since there is already a str function, 'str' would
be a bad alias.
'strutils' or 'str-utils' sound fine to
Have you considered splitting the str-utils2 into two namespaces, one
that can be imported, and another that needs to be required with a
namespace?
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 11:22 AM, Chouserchou...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Vagif Verdivagif.ve...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm
On Aug 19, 3:09 pm, Howard Lewis Ship hls...@gmail.com wrote:
Have you considered splitting the str-utils2 into two namespaces, one
that can be imported, and another that needs to be required with a
namespace?
Hi Howard,
Hadn't thought of that, actually. There are 9 conflicts, out of 32
On Aug 19, 5:16 pm, Sean Devlin francoisdev...@gmail.com wrote:
I suspect I am in the minority with my next concern. The library
takes the string as the first argument, so that it works well with the
- macro. When I originally wrote my string library, I favored this
type of signature too.
I'm also looking for a satisfactory answer to this problem.
So far I'm slightly in favor of putting the data (ie. the sequence/
collection/object ...) first in the argument list and the parameters
following.
This is because there's so many core functions that take a function
and arguments and
On Aug 19, 9:56 pm, CuppoJava patrickli_2...@hotmail.com wrote:
If I were to have my way, I would redefine all the clojure.core
functions to assume the data is the last argument instead of the
first. (this includes -) This way they would play nice with both
partial and -.
That's a really
+1
On Aug 19, 11:02 pm, Stuart Sierra the.stuart.sie...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Aug 19, 9:56 pm, CuppoJava patrickli_2...@hotmail.com wrote:
If I were to have my way, I would redefine all the clojure.core
functions to assume the data is the last argument instead of the
first. (this includes
For me, I'd like it if the core functions had the data as the first
argument, but have a special function—I can't come up with a better
name than partial-2—so that (partial-2 function opt1 opt2 opt3) is
equivalent to (fn [data] (function data opt1 opt2 opt3)). That way, I
could do things like
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 12:45 AM, samppi rbysam...@gmail.com wrote:
For me, I'd like it if the core functions had the data as the first
argument, but have a special function—I can't come up with a better
name than partial-2—so that (partial-2 function opt1 opt2 opt3) is
equivalent to (fn
20 matches
Mail list logo
