Hello Stuart! Few more ideas for you :)
each= could be extended to allow more freedom. The first parameter could say what operation we want to perform: each = each not= each < each > ... (each = a b c d) => (all-true (= a b) (= c d)) (each not= a b c d) => (all-true (not= a b) (not= c d)) Since 'each' might be too general (could it be part of Clojure core?), I also like the name is-each which fits nicely with 'is'. is-each = is-each not= ... It might be a good idea to check if count of forms passed to each/is-each is even: (if (odd? (count forms)) (throw ... "even number of forms needed!")) Many thanks, Frantisek --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
