On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 12:40 PM, Jarkko Oranen<[email protected]> wrote: > This is a common gotcha. It's actually a laziness issue: the seq > produced by filter is realised only after it exits the binding scope, > thus producing '(1). You need to use "doall" to force the seq if you > want the binding to apply.
Yeah, but more and more I'm finding that with complex code, it can be rather difficult to identify the parts that are lazy and the parts that aren't. Which makes using binding rather risky. I've started to refactor most of my code to avoid dynamic binding, because I'm tired of getting burned by this gotcha. Which is a shame. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
