For what it's worth, I would either choose "kws"/"keywords" for brevity, or "keywords-seqable" for explicitness.
All in all, better imprecise but correct than precise and incorrect. Hope this helps, -- Laurent 2014-05-16 22:38 GMT+02:00 Mars0i <marsh...@logical.net>: > > > On Friday, May 16, 2014 12:46:10 PM UTC-5, squeegee wrote: > >> >> On May 16, 2014, at 1:23 PM, Mars0i <mars...@logical.net> wrote: >> >> OK, but "seq" implies that sets aren't appropriate, but as long as I >> don't care about order, they may be perfectly fine. >> >> >> Good point. Technically kw-seq is too narrow because you probably have no >> need to restrict your argument to seqs. The distinction is often blurred >> because many Clojure functions that operate on seqs also directly or >> indirectly call “seq” on their argument. Any coll that’s “seqable” will >> also work. >> >> I think looking at the word kew-seq as an argument name, I would expect >> to be able to pass in colls that are not seqs but are seqable including >> vector and set. >> >> Revising my earlier thought: >> >> I think I’d use “kws” or “keywords” in that case. I’d expect a seq or >> seqable coll whose items are keywords. >> >> > So there really isn't a term for the category I have in mind, but your > point, I take it, is that "seq" can do the job, even for sets, despite > their lack of order, since they are things that will take on an order when > needed. > > (Keyword was just an illustration. I had a more general question in > mind. You really can pass in a map to anything that will take seqs, > vectors, and sets, in general, but sometimes it's kind of a bizarre thing > to do, and it's worth conveying that to users (even when the only user is > oneself).) > > I still would kind of like a special term .... If no one has one already, > I could try to make one up. Maybe the difference between maps and vectors > is that, although they both have keys, it's easier to lose vector keys (as > in the examples with the map function): "de-keyable", "dekeyed", > "de-pair-able"? I don't think this is going to help make my docstrings > clearer. > > -- > 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/d/optout. > -- 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/d/optout.
