I've been reading about transducers with interest. The official docs at http://clojure.org/transducers say "*Because transducers are decoupled from input or output sources, they can be used in many different processes - collections, streams, channels, observables, etc.* "
At this stage, there is direct support for collections and core.async. But, given the comment above about "observables", this got me to wondering about another scenario ... I'd like to view an atom's changes in state as a lazy sequence. The first state of the atom is like the first item in the seq, the next time the atom changes state, its new state is the second item in the seq is generated, etc. An infinite seq of new states. (I want to do this in the context of clojurescript and a GUI library called reagent. Think FRP). Now imagine that I could attach a transducer to this seq of state changes, so that I end up with a modified seq of state changes. Now, I can figure out how to do this by gluing together an atom watcher with a core.sync channel. All doable with a small bit of work, I guess. But I wondered. Given the claim above about transducers and how they can be used in the case of observables, should this atom-as-seq-with-transducer be easier? Should the IAtom interface or the add-watcher function be changed to make this process easier? Just a thought. -- Mike -- 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.
