Re: Sorry Don't understand for macro, a bug or a newbie-question??

2012-01-20 Thread aschoerk
Ah, thank you, so a newbie question. But helped me a lot. Andreas On Jan 18, 10:26 pm, Jack Moffitt j...@metajack.im wrote: doesn't show any effect of the for. The only difference is the additional statement at the end. I can not imagine how this statement sequentially behind can

Sorry Don't understand for macro, a bug or a newbie-question??

2012-01-18 Thread aschoerk
Hello, I am quite puzzled: (defn fortest1 [] (for [a (range 2 10) b (range 2 10)] (do (println x: a b: b) (list a b))) ) (fortest1) Shows the running for macro (defn fortest2 [] (for [a (range 2 10) b (range 2 10)] (do (println x: a b: b)

Re: Sorry Don't understand for macro, a bug or a newbie-question??

2012-01-18 Thread Jack Moffitt
doesn't show any effect of the for. The only difference is the additional statement at the end. I can not imagine how this statement sequentially behind can influence the for. for returns a lazy sequence. In the first case, in printing out the result to the REPL, the lazy sequence is

Re: Sorry Don't understand for macro, a bug or a newbie-question??

2012-01-18 Thread dennis zhuang
for returns a lazy sequence.You may prefer doseq: (defn fortest2 [] (doseq [a (range 2 10) b (range 2 10)] (do (println x: a b: b) (list a b))) (println ende) ) (fortest2) doseq will be forced for side-effects. 2012/1/19 Jack Moffitt j...@metajack.im doesn't show any