On Sun, 2012-01-01 at 23:16 -0500, Cedric Greevey wrote: > And that will obviously be chock-full of internals changes and > miscellaneous tweaks and not just the user-visible feature > changes/additions, aimed more at developers of Clojure itself than at > developers using Clojure to make other things.
No, it's not. That stuff is in `git log'. > Other than as a shorthand for (if (not-empty x) x) the return value is > unlikely to be used very often for more than its truthiness. Most library functions are shorthand for something else, and much of their value lies in capturing a common idiom. `not-empty' is used several times in core.clj itself, and only once as a truth test. (Moreover, that instance, in `underive', deviates from common Clojure style in other ways.) The usual function to use for truth in this situation is `seq', not `not-empty'. See core.clj: (defn empty? "Returns true if coll has no items - same as (not (seq coll)). Please use the idiom (seq x) rather than (not (empty? x))" ...and several past discussions on this list not otherwise relevant to this thread. -- Stephen Compall ^aCollection allSatisfy: [:each|aCondition]: less is better -- 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
