On Dec 6, 5:40 pm, Stuart Halloway <stuart.hallo...@gmail.com> wrote: > The world is a series of immutable states, and the future is a function of > the past. > See http://www.infoq.com/presentations/Are-We-There-Yet-Rich-Hickey.
My philosophy questions are the most interesting to people, ha! Neat link. It appears that Hickey is something of a Alfred North Whitehead apostle. Not that there's anything wrong with that. But it's interesting. I question the truth of the general view, even as I enthusiastically endorse the utility of immutability in computer programs. At the lowest level, a computer program can be visualized as a two dimensional bitmap of ones and zeroes. These bits are interpreted by the CPU starting at the "upper left", say, and they instruct the CPU what to do. The CPU in turn mutates the bitmap and proceeds, generally, across and down, unless it's instructed to move differently. Convention separates "instruction" from "data" but this is by no means written in stone. In any event, the *physical process* underlying computation, a bitmap modifying itself, appears imperative and mutable. One must jump through a lot of hoops (as Hickey can attest, I'm sure) to simulate immutability of value. Or perhaps the CPU designers are laboring under some false assumptions about reality, and CPU design itself needs to change? -- 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
