Use empty? to determine whether a seq is empty

[CampingScorpion]

empty? is simple, direct, and effective. The use of seq as a drop-in replacement for (complement empty?) is not style worth propagating, because it doesn't encourage straight-forward code readability.

[bbatsov]

I'm pretty sure "Joy of Clojure" had a section on the topic and the advice was the same. At least in loops it does make sense to me.

[CampingScorpion]

I'm not sure if that comment is agreeing or disagreeing with me, but assuming it is disagreeing, I would ask what empty? is for if not this use?

[ghoseb]

@AlexBaranosky I hear you. This is a matter of preference, really. I personally use empty? or seq depending on what makes my boolean logic simpler. For example, I would always prefer (if (seq x) ...) to (if (not (empty? x)) ...). Do you prefer using empty? unconditionally?

[technomancy]

I prefer using empty? but Rich encourages using seq as a predicate. There isn't widespread agreement on the topic.