+1
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 10:25 PM, ka sancha...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm also stuck with the same issues: 1. no option to get string keys
2. I don't understand, why do libs go through the trouble of
downcasing ?
Having said that I totally agree with the point Ryan makes: A
greater feature of
I'm also stuck with the same issues: 1. no option to get string keys
2. I don't understand, why do libs go through the trouble of
downcasing ?
Having said that I totally agree with the point Ryan makes: A
greater feature of clojure is its extensibility. What I am after is a
generalization of
Hi all,
I'm not too happy with how resultset-seq down-cases column names and
turns them into keywords, as I would prefer to work with string keys
in some cases. I came up with the following change to give the caller
a choice to remap column keys in any way. This leaves resultset-seq's
behavior
Using keywords in the resultset map is a feature. It is very common
to write something like this;
(map :your-column results)
This takes advantage of the fact that keywords implement IFn. To the
best of my knowledge SQL isn't case sensitive, downcasing the column
names makes sense too, since it
+1
On Dec 1, 8:01 pm, Ryan Twitchell metatheo...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
I'm not too happy with how resultset-seq down-cases column names and
turns them into keywords, as I would prefer to work with string keys
in some cases. I came up with the following change to give the caller
a choice
Sean,
I entirely agree that the use of keywords as map keys is a feature of
clojure (and a great one, at that), and that converting result set
column names to keywords is a feature of resultset-seq. A greater
feature of clojure is its extensibility. What I am after is a
generalization of the
