For the most part, I *believe* I understand why immutable data structures with transactions are important to manage concurrent operations to shared data, but I often wonder why it matters in some cases...
For example, what if I have a hash-map that needs to handle concurrent changes to the data structure, but never needs to have concurrent changes to a given piece of data (i.e a key/value pair). Wouldn't there be value in being able to modify the data "in-place" without making a copy, or needing to endure the overhead associated with STM? And if what I am suggesting is reasonable how can I create a mutable hash-map in Clojure and still use (mostly) the same access functions. Notes: * Yes, I have watched Rich's video on identity and state, but it hasn't helped my understand the above scenario. * I am not suggesting a hash-map data structure should support mixed operations. Thanks, Trevor -- 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
