On Dec 18, 3:03 pm, David Thomas Hume <dth...@gmail.com> wrote: > From the 1.1 release notes: > > "Futures represent asynchronous computations. They are away to get > code to run in another thread, and obtain the result." > > I know "away" is just a typo for "a way", but be damned if that isn't > the best pun I've seen in a while. > > Apologies if this seems like noise, but it brightened my last pre- > holiday work day, and I wanted to vote for not changing it, apart from > possibly adding a warning not to bank on them. > > -Dave
Topically related, there is no mention of future-call in the release notes. Aside from being an implementation detail of future, it seems useful in its own right because it's a function, not a macro, and avoids creating an additional closure if all the developer wants is to asynchronize a function call. -- 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
