I'm just wondering what's the point of binding-conveyor-fn and why is the
implementation so different from `bound-fn` et al.
It seems that the core functions use only binding-conveyor-fn.
On Friday, 21 August 2020 at 20:32:14 UTC+2 Sean Corfield wrote:
> Isn't that what bound-fn and bound-fn*
Yeah good point, thanks Sean :)
Kind regards
On Fri, 21 Aug 2020, 19:32 Sean Corfield, wrote:
> Isn't that what bound-fn and bound-fn* are for?
>
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 11:21 AM Dimitrios Jim Piliouras <
> jimpil1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> I don’t get this…
>>
>> Why would
Isn't that what bound-fn and bound-fn* are for?
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 11:21 AM Dimitrios Jim Piliouras <
jimpil1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I don’t get this…
>
> Why would such a neat/important utility private? Every time I
> submit/schedule a function to some Executor manually (not
Hi folks,
I don’t get this…
Why would such a neat/important utility private? Every time I submit/schedule a
function to some Executor manually (not via `future`
or `agent`), I need to remember to wrap it with `binding-conveyor-fn`
(otherwise dynamic bindings won’t get propagated), and every
