It seems like a pure efficiency optimization - used alone it doesn't change semantics from dosync and alter over one ref.
It makes me feel wary. What if I changed my design and wanted to do more in the same transaction? What if I later wanted to call a function that uses it in the scope of a wider transaction? Or a transaction that might retry? What if this was library code beyond my power to alter? On the other hand I understand how it could be hugely simpler and quicker, and sometimes an immediate synchronous change is the right design. Perhaps it ought to have a warning sticker. "This is a side-effecting, transaction-breaking blunt instrument contagious to any function that calls it. Prefer using a ref, especially in library code". On Dec 5, 1:02 am, Rich Hickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've added a new reference type - atom. > > Docs here: > > http://clojure.org/atoms > > Feedback welcome, > > Rich --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
