Indeed! this is a perfect discussion - great clarifications to a
worthy question
On Apr 4, 9:14 am, Rayne <disciplera...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Never be sorry about being curious.
>
> On Apr 3, 10:06 am, Berlin Brown <berlin.br...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Apr 3, 10:09 am, Stuart Halloway <stuart.hallo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > No threads:
>
> > > (ancestors (class (fn[])))
> > > -> #{java.lang.Runnable java.io.Serializable clojure.lang.AFn
> > > clojure.lang.Obj java.lang.Object clojure.lang.Fn
> > > clojure.lang.AFunction clojure.lang.IObj clojure.lang.IFn
> > > java.util.concurrent.Callable clojure.lang.IMeta java.util.Comparator}
>
> > > What you are referring to is the fact that functions implement
> > > Callable and Runnable, so that they can trivially play nice with Java
> > > threads if you need them to.
>
> > > Stu
>
> > > > Someone correct me if I go wrong here. But, from my understanding,
> > > > every defined function in Clojure is an implementation of a thread?
>
> > > > What is the goal in implementing in this fashion? For example, if I
> > > > am writing in imperative style:
>
> > > > (println "First line")
> > > > (println "Second line")
> > > > (println "Third line")
>
> > > > ...
>
> > > > The operations have to occur synchronously. What does adding Java
> > > > threading add to the mix?
>
> > oh OK, sorry about.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
