On Saturday, January 18, 2014 2:19:08 PM UTC-6, Stefan Kanev wrote:
>
> On 18/01/14, Alex Miller wrote:
> > I have some sympathy for this view of things as it was a question I had
> > while learning Clojure as well.
> >
> > The general justification for the current behavior is that the thing
> being
> > bound is always on the left and the expression defining it is always on
> the
> > right.
>
> That's not really true. For example:
>
> (let [{:keys (foo bar)} map]
> ...)
>
>
":keys" acts as syntax here. The symbols being bound ("foo" and "bar") are
still on the left and the expression "map" is on the right. Or if you
prefer, in each binding the thing being bound is first and the expression
is last.
> Here it is actually on the "right" (noting that "left" and "right" are
> very relative in this case).
>
> If I were to guess, I would say that the example above is the reason for
> the design – :keys seem useful more often than naming individual keys.
> Of course, I'm just guessing.
>
> --
> Stefan Kanev ¦ @skanev ¦ http://skanev.com/
> Beware of the Turing tar-pit in which everything is possible but nothing
> of
> interest is easy.
>
--
--
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
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Clojure" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
