I like it. I can see significant use of these to help speed up some
of the benchmark programs I've been hacking on:
git://github.com/jafingerhut/clojure-benchmarks.git
and more importantly, that means they can be good in optimizing useful
code, too :-)
I was pondering this question "If a pure function mutates some local
data in order to produce an immutable return value, is that ok?" that
Rich posed just a day or three ago, when thinking about whether there
was a way to automatically determine whether a function is pure /
"referentially transparent" or not (at least for a useful subset of
actual Clojure code). In particular, Clojure's str function does this
already with StringBuilder.append:
(defn str
;; doc string deleted for brevity
([] "")
([#^Object x]
(if (nil? x) "" (. x (toString))))
([x & ys]
((fn [#^StringBuilder sb more]
(if more
(recur (. sb (append (str (first more)))) (next more))
(str sb)))
(new StringBuilder #^String (str x)) ys)))
Very nice to see the idea generalized to Clojure data structures, too,
and the safety nets built into it in case someone forgets to call
"persistent!" on a data structure before using it in another thread.
Thanks,
Andy
On Aug 3, 2:25 pm, Rich Hickey <richhic...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've been doing some work on Transient Data Structures. You can read
> about them here:
>
> http://clojure.org/transients
>
> Feedback welcome,
>
> Rich
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
