Hmmm... I'm torn. It certainly would be useful syntax, but it might be confusing because of laziness.
I think the confusion is that it is designed around impure functions. I think this would be better use dotimes in these situations. Perhaps repeatedly itself might not be a good idea. Maybe a doalways that generates a lazy seq? I'm not quite sure. On Oct 22, 10:58 am, Stuart Halloway <[email protected]> wrote: > If that sounds good, let me know and I will create an issue and a patch. > > Stu --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
