Good Morning!

Morning

morning

morning

shame about the Glasgow clojurians meetup

anyone got office space in the central belt of Scotland that they are prepared to let a meetup use?

whut? I missed that

Morning!

Morn

question my google foo is failing me on. I'd like to do an into trasducer over 2 seqs. In non-transducer fashion I could do:

(into []
  (map (fn [x y] (vector x y)) seq-1 seq-2))

(into []
   (map (fn [x y] (vector x y)))
 seq-1
 seq-2)

I suppose the only way I can do it is by the following?

(into []
  (map (fn [x] (identity x))
 (map (fn [x y] (vector x y))))

so I have the one extra map at the beginning making my pairs to feed in, but the rest of the into transducer would be the same?

(obv (identity x) would be replaced with things that did a lot more work

Transducers aren't designed to handle multiple inputs

Sequence will let you pass multiple colls and map will accept them, but into won’t

(into [] (sequence (map (fn [x y] (vector x y)) seq-1 seq-2)) might work, but not sure if it’s legit, might be one for http://ask.clojure.org

interesting. I don't use sequence much. I mostly use into and transduce as those are the ones I've got my head around

into is eager

sequence is lazy

there aren't many lazy bits around transducers, so that gives it a rarity value

(`eduction` is sometimes lazy)

but I think its only those two...?

unless someone can remember otherwise

Would

(transduce ... (sequence ... s1 s2))

Oh. Huh. I stand corrected. Very cool.

No. I'd just use sequence.

I mean, depends what you're doing.

But probably not