This page is not created by, affiliated with, or supported by Slack Technologies, Inc.
2021-06-23
Channels
- # announcements (1)
- # asami (2)
- # aws (15)
- # babashka (4)
- # beginners (42)
- # calva (8)
- # clj-kondo (7)
- # cljsrn (31)
- # clojure (64)
- # clojure-australia (4)
- # clojure-europe (40)
- # clojure-italy (2)
- # clojure-nl (5)
- # clojure-uk (10)
- # clojured (1)
- # clojurescript (16)
- # conjure (4)
- # datomic (5)
- # defnpodcast (2)
- # events (1)
- # fulcro (61)
- # graphql (11)
- # honeysql (9)
- # jobs (3)
- # jobs-discuss (3)
- # lsp (65)
- # malli (3)
- # meander (4)
- # off-topic (5)
- # pathom (32)
- # podcasts-discuss (2)
- # polylith (2)
- # re-frame (30)
- # reitit (6)
- # remote-jobs (3)
- # ring (4)
- # shadow-cljs (19)
- # sql (28)
- # vim (1)
- # xtdb (21)
Second :clojureD 2021 talk now online: "Your own fast, native Clojure scripting CLI with GraalVM and SCI" by @borkdude https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2LAaQBVvxM
good morning!
maaaaning
Morning!
Good morning and such. TIL manqué is in fact an english adjective, meaning > Having failed to become what one might have been. What a poetic word. Erik Assum, a creator of bugs, a programmer manqué.
I’m confused now. Google also gives such an example, and Wikipedia has: > A Manqué is a person who has failed to live up to a specific expectation or ambition. It is usually used in combination with a profession: for example, a career civil servant with political prowess who nonetheless never attained political office might be described as a “politician manqué“.
Ah, used postpositively. Now scrambling for an adjective like that in Swedish. Drawing blank.
One of my favourite Clojure gotchas has been showing up in the logs, stemming from this code:
(apply max l)
Which works nicely except when it doesn’t.
l
is a list of natural ints, so we can use a wee bit of algebra here, and fix it, since we know that 0 is the identity value for max
over natural ints, so we can do:
(apply max (conj l 0))
Of course a colleague of mine pointed me to a much nicer solution:
(reduce max 0 l)
which shows that max
, 0
, and the natural ints form a monoid, since max
is also associative.> Which works nicely except when it doesn’t. oh TIL :) (or am about to L) in which case it doesn't?
Well I guess if you go in to talking about which infinities are larger and such, like is #Inf * #Inf > #Inf
and such nonsense 🙂
Fortunately, on the JVM, relative integers have a smallest element