Re: Question about 'chains' of derefs a request for better ideas

2010-04-05 Thread Bob Hutchison
On 2010-04-04, at 2:47 PM, Mark Engelberg wrote: > I don't understand why you need to "get rid of the delay" once it has been > updated. Delays are cheap; why not just be consistent about having your > data be a ref of a delay? It will keep your code simpler, and that's well > worth it. That's

Re: Question about 'chains' of derefs a request for better ideas

2010-04-04 Thread Per Vognsen
Rich has said that he intentionally didn't want to provide a uniform interface for setting and altering reference-like objects, and I agree with him. It wouldn't be difficult to have to have a function that calls send on agents, swap! on atoms, set! on vars and ref-set on refs. But it would give th

Re: Question about 'chains' of derefs a request for better ideas

2010-04-04 Thread Mark Engelberg
I don't understand why you need to "get rid of the delay" once it has been updated. Delays are cheap; why not just be consistent about having your data be a ref of a delay? It will keep your code simpler, and that's well worth it. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the G

Re: Question about 'chains' of derefs a request for better ideas

2010-04-04 Thread Bob Hutchison
On 2010-04-04, at 11:15 AM, Per Vognsen wrote: > Interesting question. Here's something I whipped up in response: > > http://gist.github.com/355456 > > I intentionally provide only lazy-alter and no lazy-ref-set. The > reason is that lazy-alter can be coded so that all the unwrapping and > rewr

Re: Question about 'chains' of derefs a request for better ideas

2010-04-04 Thread Bob Hutchison
On 2010-04-04, at 11:15 AM, Per Vognsen wrote: > Interesting question. Here's something I whipped up in response: > > http://gist.github.com/355456 > > I intentionally provide only lazy-alter and no lazy-ref-set. The > reason is that lazy-alter can be coded so that all the unwrapping and > rewr

Re: Question about 'chains' of derefs a request for better ideas

2010-04-04 Thread Per Vognsen
Interesting question. Here's something I whipped up in response: http://gist.github.com/355456 I intentionally provide only lazy-alter and no lazy-ref-set. The reason is that lazy-alter can be coded so that all the unwrapping and rewrapping of delays can be abstracted away from the user-provided

Question about 'chains' of derefs a request for better ideas

2010-04-04 Thread Bob Hutchison
Hi, I have a situation where: 1) I have a lot of 'values' that are both expensive to compute and quite large (they aren't all going to fit into memory) and most of which will not be needed (this time, but maybe later) 2) I may have a need to update several of them them (in a transaction) T