Abstract topics like this are interesting, but you may be better off starting a discussion at a more generic venue like /r/programming, because it isn't really specific to Clojure. I would assume that pervasive laziness would greatly complicate interop with hosts like the JVM.
On Tuesday, July 8, 2014 9:13:56 AM UTC-4, Ashish Negi wrote: > > I am new to clojure and finding it great.. :) > > I came across a paper - Why functional programming matters ? > at www.cs.kent.ac.uk/people/staff/dat/miranda/whyfp90.pdf > > > > to quote it : > "This paper is also relevant to the present controversy over lazy > evaluation. > Some believe that functional languages should be lazy; others believe they > should not. Some compromise and provide only lazy lists, with a special > syntax > for constructing them (as, for example, in Scheme [1]). This paper provides > further evidence that lazy evaluation is too important to be relegated to > *secondclasscitizenship*. It is perhaps the most powerful glue functional > programmers > possess. One should not obstruct access to such a vital tool." > > I know that if you people have taken some important decision for clojure, > it must had been after some thoughts. > > Was it difficult to implement or not that good ? > -- 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.
