Haha, I was just trying out traditional formatting with clojure and had left it that way without noticing.
As for the lazy thing, I should have known that as it wasn't long ago I was ready about laziness in the book I'm reading. Wrapping (dorun) around the (for) loop has fixed it. Could someone now help me with my second problem? Cheers On Feb 3, 8:50 am, Kevin Downey <redc...@gmail.com> wrote: > for is lazy, and your code formatting is horrible. > > > > On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 2:48 PM, Wardrop <t...@tomwardrop.com> wrote: > > I've noticed that the output of a script, is often different to the > > output of the same commands if run on the REPL. This makes sense, but > > here's a situation which has got me a little confused. I'm trying to > > run this code as a script... > > > (use '[clojure.contrib.duck-streams]) > > > (for [line (line-seq (reader "C:\\filedupes.txt"))] > > (cond > > ((complement nil?) (re-matches #"([0-9]+) byte\(null\)each:" > > line)) > > (println "Byte pattern!") > > ((complement nil?) (re-matches #".*(\.[0-9a-zA-Z]+)" line)) > > (println "File pattern!") > > ) > > ) > > > (println "Finished!") > > > The problem is, the only output I get is "Finished!". If however, I > > run this on the command line, I get a long list of nil's in amongst > > the strings "Byte pattern!" and "File pattern!". I expect the nil's > > not to show when this is run as a script, but why are the > > aforementioned strings not being output? > > > While you're at it, you may be able to help me with an additional > > problem I'm trying to tackle. As you can see if the above code, I'm > > trying to match on certain lines of a text file. I'm using "cond" to > > do this with as a switch statement is the only way I know how to > > achieve what I'm after. Anyway, I not only want the regex to be used > > in the condition expression, but also want to capture the first sub- > > match (i.e. what's in the parenthesis inside the regex). What's the > > best way I can do this, without having to re-run the regex twice. > > > Thanks > > > -- > > 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 that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with > > your first post. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > > For more options, visit this group at > >http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en > > -- > And what is good, Phaedrus, > And what is not good— > Need we ask anyone to tell us these things? -- 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 that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
