On 15 Jan, 17:40, Laurent PETIT <laurent.pe...@gmail.com> wrote: > Simon, > > To be very clear, and incite you to watch all those videos and read > all this material: > > One of the key motivations (if not the primary) of Rich writing > clojure has been constructing a language which would offer built-in > semantics to manage state change over time. > > So you're really in the right language regarding your concerns ! > > This is what makes clojure so different from other "pure functional > languages" or from "pure non functional languages", as Rich stated in > one of his videos: > > "Clojure has a story for the parts of your program you cannot write > purely functionally". >
Thanks Laurent, atagart, Meikel. That's all extremely helpful. I'm just now implementing the command parser, and having a lot of fun. I'm thinking about how most efficiently to use the transactional memory to hold state, but the command parser is pretty much pure functional and so is easy.
-- 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
