Errr... clarification "Scheme would blow up when doing (first (first
<object that could be '()>))."
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 7:44 AM, Andrew Gwozdziewycz <apg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 7:14 AM, Meikel Brandmeyer <m...@kotka.de> wrote:
>>
>> There's nothing stoping you to put a let in a loop.
>>
>> (loop [ps (seq pairs)
>> ret {}]
>> (let [ffps (ffirst ps)]
>> (cond
>> (not ps) ret
>> (some-test ffps) (recur (next ps) (add-to-result ret ffps))
>> :else (recur (next ps) (do-sth-else ret ffps)))))
>
> This is totally true! Scheme has been my primary Lisp since coming to
> clojure, and scheme would blow up when doing (first (first ps)) [a.k.a
> (ffirst ps)] so I never remember that it'll just return nil instead of
> blowing up (thus the reason for the (if (empty? ..)) being hoisted in
> my suggested code).
>
>
> --
> http://www.apgwoz.com
>
--
http://www.apgwoz.com
--
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
