Re: Pattern of Succinctness
Should be (filter (comp not nil?) coll) On Sunday, August 12, 2012 9:44:11 PM UTC+2, Pierre-Henry Perret wrote: I prefer (filter (partial not nil?) coll) as a HOF Le dimanche 12 août 2012 20:46:59 UTC+2, rmarianski a écrit : On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 11:22:55AM -0700, Takahiro Hozumi wrote: (filter (partial not nil?) coll) You mean (filter (comp not nil?) coll). I'm not sure which is more readable, but thanks for Meikel and Alex, I now prefer (remove nil? coll). remove is better in this case, but for posterity (comp not nil?) can be spelled as (complement nil?) Robert -- 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
Re: Pattern of Succinctness
Using threading operators + anonymous functions sometimes yields more
succinct code than using HOF,
especially because 'partial' and 'comp' are such long names:
(comp count (partial filter nil?) (partial map foo))
#(- % (map foo) (filter nil?) count)
On Sunday, August 12, 2012 7:35:16 PM UTC+2, Takahiro Hozumi wrote:
Hi,
I would like to know common technics that make code succinct.
For example:
(or (:b {:a 1}) 0)
(:b {:a 1} 0)
(if-not x 1 2)
(if x 2 1)
(filter #(not (nil? %)) coll)
(filter identity coll) ;; nearly equal
Please let me know any tips you found.
Cheers,
Takahiro.
--
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
Pattern of Succinctness
Hi,
I would like to know common technics that make code succinct.
For example:
(or (:b {:a 1}) 0)
(:b {:a 1} 0)
(if-not x 1 2)
(if x 2 1)
(filter #(not (nil? %)) coll)
(filter identity coll) ;; nearly equal
Please let me know any tips you found.
Cheers,
Takahiro.
--
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
Re: Pattern of Succinctness
Is the last one considered generally more readable? I think the following
is clearer while still not having as much noise as the first filter example:
(filter (partial not nil?) coll)
On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Takahiro Hozumi fat...@googlemail.comwrote:
Hi,
I would like to know common technics that make code succinct.
For example:
(or (:b {:a 1}) 0)
(:b {:a 1} 0)
(if-not x 1 2)
(if x 2 1)
(filter #(not (nil? %)) coll)
(filter identity coll) ;; nearly equal
Please let me know any tips you found.
Cheers,
Takahiro.
--
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 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
Re: Pattern of Succinctness
On Aug 12, 2012, at 12:38 PM, Tamreen Khan wrote: (filter #(not (nil? %)) coll) (filter identity coll) ;; nearly equal Is the last one considered generally more readable? I think the following is clearer while still not having as much noise as the first filter example: (filter (partial not nil?) coll) To me it is. I read/heard somewhere that the identity check was idiomatic, and started using it to the point where I find myself saying filter identity as slang for keeping only the valid things. but that's just me (maybe)... don't know that it is generally considered more readable (but I think so). bill -- 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
AW: Re: Pattern of Succinctness
Hi, in case you really want only nils filtered out: (filter (complement nil?) coll) or (remove nil? coll) Kind regards Meikel -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Bill Caputo logos...@gmail.com An: Tamreen Khan histor...@gmail.com Cc: clojure@googlegroups.com Gesendet: So, 12 Aug 2012, 19:43:58 MESZ Betreff: Re: Pattern of Succinctness On Aug 12, 2012, at 12:38 PM, Tamreen Khan wrote: (filter #(not (nil? %)) coll) (filter identity coll) ;; nearly equal Is the last one considered generally more readable? I think the following is clearer while still not having as much noise as the first filter example: (filter (partial not nil?) coll) To me it is. I read/heard somewhere that the identity check was idiomatic, and started using it to the point where I find myself saying filter identity as slang for keeping only the valid things. but that's just me (maybe)... don't know that it is generally considered more readable (but I think so). bill -- 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 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
Re: Pattern of Succinctness
(filter identity foos) and (filter #(not (nil? %)) foos) aren't equivalent. I prefer (remove nil? foos) Succint and direct. On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 11:13 PM, Bill Caputo logos...@gmail.com wrote: On Aug 12, 2012, at 12:38 PM, Tamreen Khan wrote: (filter #(not (nil? %)) coll) (filter identity coll) ;; nearly equal Is the last one considered generally more readable? I think the following is clearer while still not having as much noise as the first filter example: (filter (partial not nil?) coll) To me it is. I read/heard somewhere that the identity check was idiomatic, and started using it to the point where I find myself saying filter identity as slang for keeping only the valid things. but that's just me (maybe)... don't know that it is generally considered more readable (but I think so). bill -- 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 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
AW: Pattern of Succinctness
Hi,
pay attention:
(or (:a {:a false}) 0)
(:a {:a false} 0)
Same holds in case false is nil.
Using these transformations can easily introduce bugs, depending on the
context.
Kind regards
Meikel
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Takahiro Hozumi fat...@googlemail.com
An: clojure@googlegroups.com
Gesendet: So, 12 Aug 2012, 19:35:16 MESZ
Betreff: Pattern of Succinctness
Hi,
I would like to know common technics that make code succinct.
For example:
(or (:b {:a 1}) 0)
(:b {:a 1} 0)
(if-not x 1 2)
(if x 2 1)
(filter #(not (nil? %)) coll)
(filter identity coll) ;; nearly equal
Please let me know any tips you found.
Cheers,
Takahiro.
--
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 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
Re: Pattern of Succinctness
(filter (partial not nil?) coll)
You mean (filter (comp not nil?) coll).
I'm not sure which is more readable, but thanks for Meikel and Alex, I now
prefer (remove nil? coll).
Thanks.
On Monday, August 13, 2012 2:38:23 AM UTC+9, Tamreen Khan (Scriptor) wrote:
Is the last one considered generally more readable? I think the following
is clearer while still not having as much noise as the first filter example:
(filter (partial not nil?) coll)
On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Takahiro Hozumi
fat...@googlemail.comjavascript:
wrote:
Hi,
I would like to know common technics that make code succinct.
For example:
(or (:b {:a 1}) 0)
(:b {:a 1} 0)
(if-not x 1 2)
(if x 2 1)
(filter #(not (nil? %)) coll)
(filter identity coll) ;; nearly equal
Please let me know any tips you found.
Cheers,
Takahiro.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Clojure group.
To post to this group, send email to clo...@googlegroups.comjavascript:
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with
your first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+u...@googlegroups.com javascript:
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
On Monday, August 13, 2012 2:38:23 AM UTC+9, Tamreen Khan (Scriptor) wrote:
Is the last one considered generally more readable? I think the following
is clearer while still not having as much noise as the first filter example:
(filter (partial not nil?) coll)
On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Takahiro Hozumi
fat...@googlemail.comjavascript:
wrote:
Hi,
I would like to know common technics that make code succinct.
For example:
(or (:b {:a 1}) 0)
(:b {:a 1} 0)
(if-not x 1 2)
(if x 2 1)
(filter #(not (nil? %)) coll)
(filter identity coll) ;; nearly equal
Please let me know any tips you found.
Cheers,
Takahiro.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Clojure group.
To post to this group, send email to clo...@googlegroups.comjavascript:
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with
your first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+u...@googlegroups.com javascript:
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
On Monday, August 13, 2012 2:38:23 AM UTC+9, Tamreen Khan (Scriptor) wrote:
Is the last one considered generally more readable? I think the following
is clearer while still not having as much noise as the first filter example:
(filter (partial not nil?) coll)
On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Takahiro Hozumi
fat...@googlemail.comjavascript:
wrote:
Hi,
I would like to know common technics that make code succinct.
For example:
(or (:b {:a 1}) 0)
(:b {:a 1} 0)
(if-not x 1 2)
(if x 2 1)
(filter #(not (nil? %)) coll)
(filter identity coll) ;; nearly equal
Please let me know any tips you found.
Cheers,
Takahiro.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Clojure group.
To post to this group, send email to clo...@googlegroups.comjavascript:
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with
your first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+u...@googlegroups.com javascript:
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
On Monday, August 13, 2012 2:38:23 AM UTC+9, Tamreen Khan (Scriptor) wrote:
Is the last one considered generally more readable? I think the following
is clearer while still not having as much noise as the first filter example:
(filter (partial not nil?) coll)
On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Takahiro Hozumi
fat...@googlemail.comjavascript:
wrote:
Hi,
I would like to know common technics that make code succinct.
For example:
(or (:b {:a 1}) 0)
(:b {:a 1} 0)
(if-not x 1 2)
(if x 2 1)
(filter #(not (nil? %)) coll)
(filter identity coll) ;; nearly equal
Please let me know any tips you found.
Cheers,
Takahiro.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Clojure group.
To post to this group, send email to clo...@googlegroups.comjavascript:
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with
your first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+u...@googlegroups.com javascript:
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 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
Re: Pattern of Succinctness
On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 11:22:55AM -0700, Takahiro Hozumi wrote: (filter (partial not nil?) coll) You mean (filter (comp not nil?) coll). I'm not sure which is more readable, but thanks for Meikel and Alex, I now prefer (remove nil? coll). remove is better in this case, but for posterity (comp not nil?) can be spelled as (complement nil?) Robert -- 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
Re: Pattern of Succinctness
I prefer (filter (partial not nil?) coll) as a HOF Le dimanche 12 août 2012 20:46:59 UTC+2, rmarianski a écrit : On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 11:22:55AM -0700, Takahiro Hozumi wrote: (filter (partial not nil?) coll) You mean (filter (comp not nil?) coll). I'm not sure which is more readable, but thanks for Meikel and Alex, I now prefer (remove nil? coll). remove is better in this case, but for posterity (comp not nil?) can be spelled as (complement nil?) Robert -- 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
Re: Pattern of Succinctness
This doesn't work. On Sunday, August 12, 2012 12:44:11 PM UTC-7, Pierre-Henry Perret wrote: I prefer (filter (partial not nil?) coll) as a HOF Le dimanche 12 août 2012 20:46:59 UTC+2, rmarianski a écrit : On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 11:22:55AM -0700, Takahiro Hozumi wrote: (filter (partial not nil?) coll) You mean (filter (comp not nil?) coll). I'm not sure which is more readable, but thanks for Meikel and Alex, I now prefer (remove nil? coll). remove is better in this case, but for posterity (comp not nil?) can be spelled as (complement nil?) Robert -- 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
