Should Tie and Ties present a uniform interface? (e.g. (tie? (ties #{x} x)))
Environment
None
Activity
Show:
David Nolen June 10, 2013 at 10:07 PM
Ah hm, good point. Will think on it some more.
Tom Jack June 10, 2013 at 9:55 PM
Hmm.. should:
I'd think not.
Do you mean that order should always matter (take out the permutations stuff), or that it should never matter (don't use ties for cases like the above)?
David Nolen June 10, 2013 at 9:37 PM
I really don't think the set bit is necessary, the vector syntax is fine. Also avoid needing to bring IWalkTerm back for sets. And yes, tie? should work in either case.
I think it may be useful to be able to tie multiple noms in one binder, with or without significant order.
A couple use cases I've thought of so far:
Lambdas in a non-currying language. Here order matters.
My original use case, free/quantified variables in logical formulas. Order doesn't matter (note the second body has its noms swapped).
I have a draft implementation here: https://github.com/tomjack/core.logic/compare/ties
Possible issues with this implementation:
Is it OK to reextend IWalkTerm to IPersistentSet?
Should Tie and Ties present a uniform interface? (e.g. (tie? (ties #{x} x)))