On 15 Mar 2013, at 09:23, Marko Topolnik <marko.topol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This is not about bureaucracy --- it's about API contract, Quite. > you must preserve laziness whenever applicable, but you may not take > advantage of it by assuming any guarantees. Erm - I certainly hope that this isn't true. Otherwise, I wouldn't be able to write: (take 10 (repeatedly 0)) Because, without *some* guarantees, it might never terminate and/or consume all memory. Of course, the only guarantee that this requires is the one that you mentioned in your earlier mail, that there will be *some* upper bound to how much of the sequence is realised. But it would be nice if there was an official statement to that end somewhere. And if there are other guarantees that can be relied upon, it would be nice to know what they were... -- paul.butcher->msgCount++ Snetterton, Castle Combe, Cadwell Park... Who says I have a one track mind? http://www.paulbutcher.com/ LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/paulbutcher MSN: p...@paulbutcher.com AIM: paulrabutcher Skype: paulrabutcher -- -- 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 --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
