Hi, I may be missing something here, since this thread leaves me a bit confused.
1. Why are you using a Ref for the bank in the first place? It is a single identity and thus should be an atom, because you do not need to coordinate changes of at least two identities. If I am not mistaken, the generic bank transfer example is to have a Ref for each of the accounts and to make sure, that there is never a state of the world in which the money is missing or is available twice. 2. "Even our side-effecting fns return something (per alter) which is good." -> That seems debatable to me. 3. Why do you nest transactions on the same Ref in transfer1 and transfer? Don't get me wrong, what you're doing may be fine. In that case, I just don't get it. Which, in turn, may be a relevant feedback to you, since this is to be educational :-) Kind regards, Stefan -- -- 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.
