Clojurians Log v2

a) kvseq was needed because there is no ..!n equivalent for maps b) associations is needed to convert memory variables and partitions to rows. I think this might be useful to meander users and hope you consider including something like it in meander. Is it actually as useful as I think it is? Maybe it doesn’t come up much, or maybe if we had substitution equivalents it would be unnecessary. c) nest-by is needed because meander doesn’t have a way of expressing reduction/aggregation.

It’s also very interesting to me that when you put the pattern and associations function side by side you can see clearly that one implies the other:

([!lang ([!num !word] ..!n)] ...)
(associations [!lang] [!num !word] !n)

Haven't had a chance to deep dive on this. But you can match maps with seqable. And seqable supports ..!n.

[meander/epsilon "0.0.356"]

Comparing with the search approach:

(m/search {1 {:en "one", :de "eins", :fr "un"}
            2 {:en "two", :de "zwei", :fr "deux" :es "dos"}
            3 {:en "three", :de "drei", :fr "trois"}
            5 {:fr "cinq"}}
           (m/scan [?num (m/scan [?lang ?word])])
           [?lang ?num ?word])

This is going to sound pushy, but it's actually half conversational and half curiosity... How's Zeta?

I’ve been distracted by issues with epsilon and haven’t had a chance to resume working on zeta. But unless much more comes up, I think its safe to say I’ll resume working on the branch.

Here’s a question: should match just be find that throws an error when nothing matches?

Whats motivating the curiosity?

Personally I don't think so. I like that match is restricted to things that are unambiguous.

Talking about code standards internally at work. I'm thinking the update in place will make my work on cinder much easier. But also just seeing the updates to epsilon and realizing I don't entirely understand how you work and transition. Nor do I understand all the goals of Zeta, and if you're reaching them.

Basically, until zeta becomes the primary branch, I will continue to address epsilon issues as they come up and I can fix them without breaking existing code. To be clear, I am personally not invested in working on implementing and update-in-place operator because I’m satisfied with cata for that. At the same time, I’m not opposed to having such an operator. @jimmy is interested in this too. Maybe the two of you could work together on a concept/implementation?

The goals of zeta are to define a new AST for the syntax and to implement an interpreter/compiler that are semantically equivalent.

I thought Zeta made this easier, going to double check what I read 😊

Yeah, the hope from Jimmy was that Zeta will bring this in some manner. @jimmy totally happy to describe my problems in excruciating detail and get some guidance on how to solve that.

@noprompt what problems do those changes solve?

Epsilon could have update in place. There’s nothing stopping us there. Zeta is purely about a better AST, interpreter, and compiler.

Yeah, that was my general I interpretation which gets me wanting to work on this sooner.

There is plenty of room for additional innovation in the strategy namespace.

I welcome that.

Yeah I am happy to have someone else to help with brainstorming update in place. I'd love to see some ideas and think about implementation. I'd definitely love to hear about your problems and think about what currently exists and what we could build in epsilon. I said zeta simply because my hope is that it will make building that stuff trivial. (also happy to explain the experiment we are trying with zeta) @dominicm feel free to private message me and we can chat about it (might be busy over the weekend though).

Please share any good ideas you come up with in the channel. 😀

Of course

One thing that would be really cool and I’ve been wanting is to have a compiled, strategy thingy. Update in place would be nice to have.

Hi! I'm giving meander a try on some toy problems - it's a blast! Would it be possible to partition-by sequences with meander? E.g.:

;; 0 is the separator
(meander-magic [1 2 3 0 4 5 6 0 7 8 0 9])
;; => ([1 2 3] [4 5 6] [7 8] [9])

Here's the closest I could get, but I can't find my way around the sub-sequences being returned as well

(m/search [1 2 3 0 4 5 6 0 7 8 0 9]
  (m/or
   (m/scan
    (m/pred (complement zero?) !els) ..1
    . (m/pred zero?) ...)
   (m/scan
    (m/pred zero?) ..1
    (m/pred (complement zero?) !els) ..1))
  !els)
;; => ([1] [1 2] [1 2 3] [1 2 3] [2] [2 3] [2 3] [3] [3] [4] [4 5] [4 5 6] [4 5 6] [5] [5 6] [5 6] [6] [6] [7] [7 8] [7 8] [8] [8] [9] [4] [4 5] [4 5 6] [7] [7 8] [9])

Compiled strategy?