halgari

(ns extend-core-logic.core
    (:require [clojure.core.logic :refer :all]
              [clojure.core.logic.protocols :refer [walk]]
              [clojure.java.io :as jio]
              [clojure.string :as string])
    (:import [java.io BufferedReader StringReader]))

;; from: http://federalgovernmentzipcodes.us/
(defn load-db []
  (let [data (java.io.BufferedReader. (java.io.StringReader. (slurp "/Users/tim/Downloads/free-zipcode-database.csv")))

halgari

So you’d like to contribute to Clojure, great! Let’s talk about what that involves.

The first thing you’ll want to make sure is that your idea is valid, and that you won’t spend a ton of time working on something that won’t make into master. To do this, you should create a JIRA ticket. For example, let’s say we want to improve how core.async handles channel closing propagation. It’s not a super complex problem, but there are some design questions about which of the various semantics currently in place should be the default, and if some semantics should be configurable.

So start by making a JIRA ticket and stating what the problem is you’re trying to solve, what the possible options for solving the problem. Now hit save and wait for the ticket to be triaged. Alex Miller will take a look when he can, and that can take a few days to a few weeks, depending on the time of the year (he has other responsibilities). Alex may out-right reject the idea if he knows Rich would never approve the ticket, but otherwise h

halgari

The question was asked why I (as a programmer who prefers dynamic languages) don't consider static types "worth it". Here
is a short list of what I would need from a type system for it to be truely useful to me: 

1) Full type inference. I would really prefer to be able to write: 

(defn concat-names [person]
  (assoc person :full-name (str (:first-name person)
                                (:second-name person))))

And have the compiler know that whatever type required and produced from this function was acceptible as long as the 

halgari

(defn r-some?
  "Super fast version of clojure.core/some that does minimal allocation"
 [pred coll]
 (reduce
   (fn [acc v]
     (if-let [val (pred coll)]
       (reduced val)
       acc))
   false
   coll)) 

halgari

(ns scratch)

(defn map [f]
  (fn [xf]
    (fn
      ([] (xf))
      ([acc] (xf acc))
      ([acc itm]
       (xf acc (f itm))))))

halgari

(ns morel.core
  (:import (com.oracle.truffle.api.nodes RootNode NodeInfo Node$Child))
  (:require [clojure.interop :refer [defclass]]
            [clojure.reflect :as reflect]))

(defclass
  ^{NodeInfo {:language "SL"
              :description "The root of all SL execution trees"}}
  SLRootNode [language
              frame-descriptor

halgari

(defn unordered-pmap [threads f in-c out-c]
  (let [remain (atom threads)]
    (dotimes [x threads]
      (go-loop []
        (if-some [v (<! in-c)]
          (do (>! out-c (f v))
              (recur))

halgari

(ns async-examples.load-balancer
  (:require [clojure.core.async :refer :all]))


;; Let's assume we have a DB, and it holds the following pairs of name/ages

(def db-store
  {:john 42
   :amy 33
   :jill 3

halgari

We were keeping our eye on 1984. When the year came and the prophecy didn't, thoughtful Americans sang softly in praise of themselves. The roots of liberal democracy had held. Wherever else the terror had happened, we, at least, had not been visited by Orwellian nightmares.
But we had forgotten that alongside Orwell's dark vision, there was another - slightly older, slightly less well known, equally chilling: Aldous Huxley's Brave New World. Contrary to common belief even among the educated, Huxley and Orwell did not prophesy the same thing. Orwell warns that we will be overcome by an externally imposed oppression. But in Huxley's vision, no Big Brother is required to deprive people of their autonomy, maturity and history. As he saw it, people will come to love their oppression, to adore the technologies that undo their capacities to think.

What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one. O

halgari

We were keeping our eye on 1984. When the year came and the prophecy didn't, thoughtful Americans sang softly in praise of themselves. The roots of liberal democracy had held. Wherever else the terror had happened, we, at least, had not been visited by Orwellian nightmares.
But we had forgotten that alongside Orwell's dark vision, there was another - slightly older, slightly less well known, equally chilling: Aldous Huxley's Brave New World. Contrary to common belief even among the educated, Huxley and Orwell did not prophesy the same thing. Orwell warns that we will be overcome by an externally imposed oppression. But in Huxley's vision, no Big Brother is required to deprive people of their autonomy, maturity and history. As he saw it, people will come to love their oppression, to adore the technologies that undo their capacities to think.

What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one. O