On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 12:31 AM, Brian Guthrie <btguth...@gmail.com> wrote:
> But I'm troubled by the idea of accepting channels as arguments, even > though there's a lot to be said for consumer control of buffer sizes (to > say nothing of providing potential fakes for test purposes). In that > scenario you'd essentially be *mutating* the input when you set up the > go-loop that feeds (or takes input from) the channel, yes? So in effect > they become out-params. > Once you start messing around with channels, you're no longer in the pure-functional business. Channels aren't values. Things which use channels are processes, not functions. -S -- 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/d/optout.
