On Wednesday, April 16, 2014 2:39:24 PM UTC-5, gianluca torta wrote: > > this issue on core.typed > http://dev.clojure.org/jira/browse/CTYP-96<http://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fdev.clojure.org%2Fjira%2Fbrowse%2FCTYP-96&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNFtiMksWlWr1XT8J0zwKsQ1xvo2jQ> > > in particular the comment: > "This is starting to make me rethink what a clojure.core docstring means > exactly by a "lazy sequence" >
Even if we interpreted "lazy sequence" so that a Cons containing a LazySeq would count as a lazy sequence, making the docstring for iterate correct, the docstring for realized? would be wrong. Thanks for the JIRA reference. That issue was resolved, I gather because it only concerned the return type of iterate itself. Mikera wrote: "The difference is that the former ... probably performs slightly better in some circumstances, and since you already have x as a value it probably makes sense to do this eagerly since no arbitrary computation is being done (f doesn't need to be called yet in either case)." But then should realized? be able to deal with a Cons containing a LazySeq? (Is this an issue worthy of JIRA? I've never submitted there, and am not sure I know enough to do so. Willing to try to figure it out.) -- 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 --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
