Vars named **

"Warning: ** not declared dynamic and thus is not dynamically rebindable, but its name suggests otherwise. Please either indicate ^:dynamic ** or change the name." *foo* is earmuffed, but ** has nothing between the astersisks to be earmuffed. Far more likely is that someone has defined a

Re: Vars named **

This was fixed in http://dev.clojure.org/jira/browse/CLJ-1233 way back in Clojure 1.6. On Saturday, June 4, 2016 at 5:25:34 PM UTC-5, Fluid Dynamics wrote: > > "Warning: ** not declared dynamic and thus is not dynamically rebindable, > but its name suggests otherwise. Please either indicate

Q: Is there a reason why some clojure.test.check generators are excluded from clojure.spec.gen lazy primitives?

Is there a reason why some clojure.test.check generators are excluded from clojure.spec.gen lazy primitives? https://github.com/clojure/clojure/blob/1f25347a7b219488d5d9f8d17b04f2cc7828b30e/src/clj/clojure/spec/gen.clj#L114 The nat generator as one example is missing. Best regards, Joe N --

Re: [ANN] Clojure 1.9.0-alpha4

I support this change. Not only is it closer to the GIGO philosophy, but "let x in S" is actually a very reasonable use-case. Sometimes I just want an element from a set and I don't care about which particular one. Your code may break if you're using try/catch to handle sets in a special way,

Re: Is there any desire or need for a Clojure DataFrame? (X-POST from Numerical Clojure mailing list)

Hi I'm interested in Clojure DataFrame implementation. How is this going now? Are you coding for core.matrix or are you writing a new library from scratch? How can I join in this project? 在 2016年3月10日星期四 UTC+8上午4:57:31，arthur.ma...@gmail.com写道： > > Is there any desire or need for a Clojure

Re: [ANN] Clojure 1.9.0-alpha4

On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 9:28 AM, <676c7...@gmail.com> wrote: > This isn’t only an optimisation but also a change in behaviour, isn’t > it? > > Clojure 1.9.0-alpha3: > > user=> (let [[x & xs] #{1 2 3}] x) > UnsupportedOperationException nth not supported on this type: > PersistentHashSet

Re: [ANN] Clojure 1.9.0-alpha4

This isn’t only an optimisation but also a change in behaviour, isn’t it? Clojure 1.9.0-alpha3: user=> (let [[x & xs] #{1 2 3}] x) UnsupportedOperationException nth not supported on this type: PersistentHashSet clojure.lang.RT.nthFrom (RT.java:948) Clojure 1.9.0-alpha4: user=> (let [[x & xs]

Re: [ANN] Clojure 1.9.0-alpha4

Hi Alex, On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 3:22 PM, Alex Miller wrote: > Why? > Because unordered collections shouldn't have heads defined. Is (first #{3 1 2}) => 3? or 2? or 1? (I just tried it in a REPL and it is apparently 1.) > > -- > You received this message because you

Re: [ANN] Clojure 1.9.0-alpha4

How is this a regression? It doesn't cause any code that used to work to stop working. The fact that tail destructuring now causes non-sequential collections to be destructured by sequential destructuring should be just considered an instance of GIGO and an implementation detail. > On 4 Jun

Re: [ANN] Clojure 1.9.0-alpha4

Why? -- 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

Re: [ANN] Clojure 1.9.0-alpha4

What are you asking “Why?” about? You haven’t quoted anything so it’s not clear what you’re asking about. Alan On 4 Jun 2016, at 13:22, Alex Miller wrote: > Why? > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Clojure" group. > To