Using core.async, I've understood the convention to be that if you take nil from a channel, that channel is closed. This seems to hold for most cases, but I've found a corner case when using map< that lets you pull nil from a channel that is not closed.
(def a (chan)) (def c (map< seq a)) (go (prn (<! c))) (>!! a []) ; => nil nil ;; [one nil is printed, one is returned] (go (prn (<! c))) (>!! a [1]) ; => nil (1) This can be chained as well (e.g. (map< identity (map< seq a)) ), and nils just flow through. >From looking at the implementation, it's apparent that this happens because the function application of map happens when taking from the output channel so nil is not technically on the channel, (unless it flows through to another map). Is this a bug or is my mental model of nil => closed incorrect? Thanks, Alejandro -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] 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 [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
