On 31 December 2011 17:44, Timothy Baldridge <tbaldri...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yeah, I hadn't thought of the issue of the refs, but I don't think > it's a exceptionally hard problem to solve.
It's not really possible to solve completely. If I serialize, then deserialize an immutable data structure, then for all intents and purposes I'm left with something equivalent to the original. If I serialize and deserialize a ref, then what I have is a completely different ref that happens to contain the same data structure. I cannot use this new ref as a substitute for the original, as I could with a normal data structure. This is not to say that serializing a ref is not useful, just that we can't put it in the same category as a data structure. I'd like a way to distinguish between data that can be serialized, like maps or vectors, and data that can only be "sort-of" serialized, like refs. - James -- 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
