On Jul 25, 3:20 pm, Mark Volkmann <r.mark.volkm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Should I use this mailing list to suggest changes to the Clojure
> implementation or some other avenue?
>
> Some suggestions I may have are pretty simple.
> For example, in LockingTransaction.java I see:
>
> ref.validate(ref.getValidator(), e.getValue());
>
> That could be replaced by:
>
> ref.validate(e.getValue());
>
> because the validate method in ARef.java is overloaded and the version
> that just takes the proposed new value uses the same validator
> function returned by ref.getValidator().
>
Unless it substantially improves something, I think any such changes
are just a distraction.
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
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your
first post.
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
