Comments on: Pipe dreams aren’t necessarily made of promises

By: A LinkedBlockingQueue Transport for Conduit (or one way of sucking async data into a distributed processing system) « boss-level.com

Mon, 24 Jan 2011 10:27:20 +0000

[...] input. I needed to convert input to a more sanitary thing, and so lifted a page directly from the CGrand Master himself. In that post he shows how to create a LinkedBlockingQueue (henceforth LBQ to save pixels), [...]

By: Meikel

Meikel — Thu, 08 Apr 2010 08:03:57 +0000

@William: In Clojure vectors are preferred over lists in such cases.

By: cgrand

cgrand — Sat, 03 Apr 2010 18:08:05 +0000

@Olivier: un atome Clojure est une référence mutable synchrone non coordonnée (ne participe pas à une transaction) qui est basée sur une opération CAS. Le CAS pouvant échouer, la fonction de mise à jour peut être appliquée plusieurs fois : c’est ça la spinning nature of atoms ! Et oui en écrivant ceci je trouvais ça quantiquement drôle.

By: Olivier

Olivier — Fri, 02 Apr 2010 15:24:27 +0000

J’y comprends toujours rien… mais la “spinning nature of atoms” ? Clojure sert à programmer des ordinateurs quantiques ?

By: Stuart

Stuart — Fri, 02 Apr 2010 14:48:58 +0000

Nice. It took me a moment to understand the purpose of the NIL object, until I found that LinkedBlockingQueue.put won’t accept a null pointer.

By: William Hidden

William Hidden — Fri, 02 Apr 2010 14:38:24 +0000

why did you decide to return a vector instead of a list?

By: Edmund

Edmund — Fri, 02 Apr 2010 14:10:25 +0000

Thanks again Christophe.

By: Clojure and me » Are pipe dreams made of promises?

Clojure and me » Are pipe dreams made of promises? — Fri, 02 Apr 2010 12:33:41 +0000

[...] follow-up: pipe dreams aren’t necessarily made of promises [...]