(merge {:attr something} obj)
--
--
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
Sorry, that's just another suggestion for the first pattern.
For the second, I would use:
(cond- obj (some-test obj) some-transformation)
On Sunday, May 26, 2013 12:05:49 PM UTC+2, dmirylenka wrote:
(merge {:attr something} obj)
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed
On 25/05/13 12:24, Steven Degutis wrote:
The first is: (if (:attr obj) obj (assoc obj :attr something))
I'm basically saying, give this hash-map an attribute if it doesn't
already have it. And just return the thing with an attribute,
regardless if I had to add it or not.
(if (contains? obj
may I see the macro for the latter, if you decide to go that way ? thx
On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Steven Degutis sbdegu...@gmail.com wrote:
There are two patterns I find in my code that I'm still unhappy with but I
don't know how to clean up.
The first is: (if (:attr obj) obj (assoc
no need for macros... :)
(definline safe-assoc [m k v]
`(if (contains? ~m ~k) ~m
(assoc ~m ~k ~v)))
(definline pred-transform [obj pred tf]
`(if ~(pred obj) ~obj
~(tf obj)))
Jim
On 25/05/13 12:44, atkaaz wrote:
may I see the macro for the latter, if you decide to go that way ? thx
didn't know about definline, thanks Jim!
On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Jim - FooBar(); jimpil1...@gmail.comwrote:
no need for macros... :)
(definline safe-assoc [m k v]
`(if (contains? ~m ~k) ~m
(assoc ~m ~k ~v)))
(definline pred-transform [obj pred tf]
`(if ~(pred obj) ~obj
just wondering if obj is a form does it get evaluated twice?
On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Jim - FooBar(); jimpil1...@gmail.comwrote:
no need for macros... :)
(definline safe-assoc [m k v]
`(if (contains? ~m ~k) ~m
(assoc ~m ~k ~v)))
(definline pred-transform [obj pred tf]
`(if
Shouldn't it be like:
(definline pred-transform [obj pred tf]
`(if (~pred ~obj) ~obj
(~tf ~obj)))
= (pred-transform 1 #(not (nil? %)) println)
1
= (pred-transform 1 nil? println)
1
nil
On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 2:55 PM, atkaaz atk...@gmail.com wrote:
just wondering if obj is a form
in which case it does get evaluated twice if form:
= (pred-transform (println 1) #(not (nil? %)) #(println % .))
1
1
nil .
nil
= (pred-transform (println 1) nil? #(println % .))
1
1
nil
so maybe a let + gensym would be in order?
On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 3:04 PM, atkaaz atk...@gmail.com wrote:
like:
= (definline pred-transform [obj pred tf]
`(let [o# ~obj]
(if (~pred o#) o#
(~tf o#
#'cgws.notcore/pred-transform
= (pred-transform (println 1) nil? #(println % .))
1
nil
= (pred-transform (println 1) #(not (nil? %)) #(println % .))
1
nil .
nil
On Sat, May 25, 2013 at
I wonder why the definline didn't act like a function?
= (defn pred-transform [obj pred tf]
(if (pred obj) obj
(tf obj)))
#'cgws.notcore/pred-transform
= (pred-transform (println 1) #(not (nil? %)) #(println % .))
1
nil .
nil
= (pred-transform (println 1) nil? #(println % .))
1
nil
=
On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 3:16 PM, Steven Degutis sbdegu...@gmail.com wrote:
Also I just remembered, sometimes to solve the second one, I would do ((if
condition transformer identity) obj) but that feels ugly.
but the condition has to contain obj, so obj is referred twice ? otherwise
i kinda
(update-in obj [:attr] #(or %1 %2) something)
(cond- obj (not (:attr obj)) (assoc :attr something))
--
--
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
Seems like I almost want arbitrary or-like behavior, like
only-sometimes-evaluation of a conditional form.
I feel like this could have something to do with lazy sequences, since
technically has the option of never getting evaluated. We could use map.
Will test some things out in nrepl.el and
so maybe a let + gensym would be in order?
yes that is what you do to avoid double-evaluation...:) I was making a
different point though, the fact that definline produces a first class
fn which still expands like a macro.
Jim
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to
yep that was interesting thanks btw; it was a function that was acting like
a macro, how odd
On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 4:26 PM, Jim - FooBar(); jimpil1...@gmail.comwrote:
so maybe a let + gensym would be in order?
yes that is what you do to avoid double-evaluation...:) I was making a
Here's my solution to your problem. Let me know if it helps.
```
user (defn if-attr [-key obj missing]
(if-let [ret (get obj -key)] ret (assoc obj -key missing)))
#'user/if-attr
user (if-attr :abc {} missing-value)
{:abc missing-value}
user (if-attr :abc {:abc 123} missing-value)
123
user
I just realised you can also do this to get the same effect of
pred-transform...This is the first time I'm using cond-! I'm starting
to realise its usefuleness... :)
(let [rpred (complement pred)]
(cond- obj
(pred obj) identity ;;if true return it untouched
(rpred obj)
Another solution, repeats itself slightly less:
(assoc obj
:key (or (:key obj)
(something-else-with-side-effects-maybe?)))
Not sure I like it much better than the first one. But I usually prefer not
writing my own macros/functions when I can avoid it, so it has that plus.
On Sat,
19 matches
Mail list logo
