On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 1:38 PM, Meikel Brandmeyer <[email protected]> wrote: > Am 23.12.2008 um 17:10 schrieb J. McConnell: > >> This was my intuitive guess as well. However, looking at condp, it >> seems that Rich prefers (at least in that case) option 2 (note the (= >> 0 n) clause in the cond expression): > > No. This case is different. The exception is part of > the runtime: if no condp clause triggered and there > is no default clause supplied, the exception is thrown. > This has nothing todo with providing wrong inputs to > the macro.
Ahh, right. Thanks ... it's good to know that at least my intuition wasn't too off-base :) - J. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
