The problems are real. Well done!
--
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
Another apporach I think would be modifying the data structure of
hierarchy itself. The idea is to add a counter to ancestors and
descendants.
:ancestors: { :c #{ [:a1 1] [:a2 2] } }
So, the counter 2 on :a2 means how many paths can you get :c to
reach :a2. When the counter reaches 0, you can
Yeah, it's intended, just like what Ulrich showed. The same comment
appears on the doc of release-pending-sends.
In your case, the inner send-off doesn't rely on the result of the
outter send-off. So, you can use release-pending-sends.
The following code will have hey printed right away.
(send
Very clear, much appreciate!
On Jun 4, 2:55 am, Chouser chou...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 9:38 AM, YD ydong.pub...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
When 'destructure' is doing a map destructuring, 'pmap' is the
function to use. 'pmap' will do some kind of process to the given
bindings
(defmacro bound-fn
[ fntail]
`(bound-fn* (fn ~...@fntail)))
Shouldn't it be: (fn [] ~...@fntail) ?
If you try to use this function by passing more than one function as
arguments to it, you'll get an exception. e.g. (bound-fn f1 f2)
I'm a newbie to clojure and I'm not quite sure if this is a
Thank you, now I see the point.
--
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
