IMHO, any built-in string compare should support collations. I think
this belongs in contrib in string.

On Nov 29, 2:59 am, Tim Robinson <tim.blacks...@gmail.com> wrote:
> why not change > < type compare functions do a compare on strings as
> well?
>
> (defn >
>         ([x] true)
>   ([x y](if (string? x)
>             (. clojure.lang.Numbers (isPos (.compareTo x y)))
>             (. clojure.lang.Numbers (gt x y))))
>   ([x y & more]
>           (if (> x y)
>         (if (next more)
>             (recur y (first more) (next more))
>             (> y (first more)))
>         false)))
>
> (defn <
>         ([x] true)
>   ([x y](if (string? x)
>             (. clojure.lang.Numbers (isNeg (.compareTo x y)))
>             (. clojure.lang.Numbers (gt x y))))
>   ([x y & more]
>           (if (< x y)
>         (if (next more)
>             (recur y (first more) (next more))
>             (< y (first more)))
>         false)))
>
> It's just cleaner so we can do things like:
>
> user=> (< "2010-06-11" "2010-11-01")
> true
>
> user=> (< "Banana" "Apple")
> false
>
> make sense?
>
> Notes:
> * I ran a bunch of benchmarks, showing no real impact on performance.
> * probably would need to include >= and <= too.

-- 
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

Reply via email to