你即將離開本站

並前往https://www.reddit.com/r/Clojure/comments/8f138f/please_use_the_idiom_seq_x_rather_than_not_empty_x/

Please use the idiom (seq x) rather than (not (empty? x)) - Reddit

From my understanding, clojure.core tries to be as minimal as it can. Thus when it came to implement not-empty?, you already had a function called seq which ...

確定！ 回上一頁

查詢 「Clojure not empty」的人也找了：

  1. clojure every
    2.
  2. Clojure not empty
    3.
  3. clojure not-empty vs seq
    4.
  4. clojure not nil
    5.
  5. clojure some
    6.
  6. seq clojure
    7.
  7. clojure not-any
    8.
  8. clojure any?
    9.