Hello Ryan, On Jun 21, 7:34 am, Ryan Senior <senior.r...@gmail.com> wrote: > 1 - I think a good improvement would be updating the docs for the future > related functions to indicate what kind of objects are passed in and > returned. Users would then not have to go through the source to see what's > being returned. This could also be useful to know if users were getting > java.util.concurrent.Future instances from other places and wanted to use > them with the Clojure API.
Judging from previous discussions on this list, I get the feeling that relying too much on the Java implementation details underlying the public Clojure APIs is discouraged. This certainly makes sense considering that apparently one of the future plans (no pun intended) is to give the CLR and JavaScript ports of the language more focus. > 2 - Is there a reason that get with a timeout from > java.util.concurrent.Future is not included in the Clojure future > functions? It seems to be the only one missing and having that function > would make the details around what kind of object is returned/passed in by > these functions less important. Maybe future-await or something? What sort > of time parameter would this new function would accept? The > java.util.concurrent.Future.get method uses an int and the > java.util.concurrent.TimeUnit enum. IMHO this seems like a useful improvement. Maybe your proposal would draw more attention if you backed it up with a patch -- even a preliminary one? :-) Have a nice day, -- Daniel -- 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
