Hi, On May 27, 9:50 pm, Laurent PETIT <laurent.pe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> But you will still have the cost of creating 2 or 3 times several millions > of Seq objects, even if they are quickly made GCable. But then: why do it in Clojure, when you need close control anyway? I see the main benefit in Clojure in having very high-level structures available. If their use is not feasible, why not simply drop down to Java or Assembly or whatever? The resulting Clojure code will be just as ugly anyway. > The OP said that arrays will be several gigabytes in size, so even if the > set of different docs in much less than that by an order of magnitude (or > even 2), memoizing a million of docs and then being forced to kill the VM > may not be an option for him ! Ah ok. The OP said also, that loading a new document invalidates the previous one, which I understood as "it releases the resources of the previous one". Buffers and such. But you would still have references to now invalid structures building up in the memoize cache. You are right. Here the modified memoize could come in handy with a FifoStrategy and queue size of 1. So as soon as the next document is loaded the previous one would drop out of the memoize cache. Sincerely Meikel -- 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
