On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Meikel Brandmeyer <m...@kotka.de> wrote: > Hi, > > Am 06.12.2010 um 11:40 schrieb Ken Wesson: > >> Won't that make the internal recursive call fail though? > > No. Because the metadata is just documentation. > >> And even if not -- ugly IMO. :) > > Tastes vary. I prefer this over a second toplevel function named foo-aux or > the like. I also prefer it over a nested let. That said, I hardly ever run > into this pattern. Maybe because I use reduce in 95% of such cases.
A reduce that discards one of its arguments (e.g. (reduce (fn [n _] (inc n)) coll)) also strikes me as slightly icky. :) -- 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
