You're doing amazing work! I look forward to the result. On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 5:37 PM, Paul Stadig <p...@stadig.name> wrote:
> I've been speaking with the Terracotta engineers, so here is an update on a > couple of the issues: > > 1) array.clone(). It turns out this is a bug in Terracotta. They have > acknowledged it, and will be working to resolve it. However, they mentioned > (as I have found else where on the interweb[1][2]) that arraycopy is > slightly faster than array.clone(), though nothing to write home about, so > it may be worth rolling that change back into Clojure, or at least it won't > hurt. > > 2) AtomicReference. They seem to think that adding support for AR in > Terracotta is low hanging fruit for someone who wants to write a patch, and > somehow they roped me into doing it. ;) > > 3) Boolean.TRUE != Boolean.TRUE across VMs. This also is a bug that they > are working to resolve. > > So it looks like three of the biggest issues I had to work around in > getting Clojure to work with Terracotta, will be resolved on the Terracotta > side. This means that the Terracotta Integration Module that I wrote[3] will > pretty much boil down to a configuration file. > > I think the only other *serious* issue is the problem with *in*, *out*, and > *err*. Either they need to be made into "special" vars, or derefed > specially, because their root values cannot be put into the TC cluster. > > That's all folks! > > > Paul > > [1] > http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.java.programmer/msg/f63fdf8da28004f0 > [2] http://www.javapractices.com/topic/TopicAction.do?Id=3 > [3] http://github.com/pjstadig/tim-clojure-1.0-snapshot/tree/master > > > On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 7:38 PM, Rich Hickey <richhic...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Mar 30, 5:12 pm, Paul Stadig <p...@stadig.name> wrote: >> > I have gotten to the point in my Clojure + Terracotta experiment, where >> I >> > believe all of the features of Clojure are functional (Refs, Atoms, >> > transactions, etc.). I do not have a way to extensively test the Clojure >> > functionality, but I have run the clojure.contrib.test-clojure test >> suites >> > successfully, as well as some simple tests on my machine. >> > >> > There are still some open issues (though not necessarily deal killers), >> and >> > given the limited extent to which I have tested this, I would not >> consider >> > this production quality in the least. I would welcome help from the >> Clojure >> > community in testing this integration module. I'm sure there are >> unexplored >> > corners. >> > >> > Being that several of the changes are relatively trivial, they could be >> > easily integrated back into the Clojure core. I have detailed as best as >> > possible the changes I had to make to Clojure in this report: Clojure + >> > Terracotta Integration Report >> > (http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dg7c7v49_241g5t8tqsv)< >> http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dg7c7v49_241g5t8tqsv>It >> > is very possible that I have misunderstood things, so if there is a >> > better way to accomplish any of the solutions, then let me know. >> > >> > I would welcome any comments, feedback, etc. >> > >> >> Thanks for the detailed report! I'll look through it soon. >> >> 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 clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
