Hi Laurent, On Sep 30, 9:46 am, Laurent PETIT <laurent.pe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Where should the responsability be placed ? Should the user of the library, > in doubt, place everywhere in his code bind-fn calls to protect it ? Should > the library author use bind-fn before dispatching to other threads (with the > problem that the library author may not know which dynamic vars are > relevant) ... I think the responsibility should be placed with the one creating another thread. There are several scenarios: * in the library: * if only library code is involved the author knows (hopefully) whether the dynamic environment must be saved or not * if a user callback is involved, require it to be pure (ie. depending only on the arguments) or * use bound-fn to be safe if non-pure functions are allowed. * in the user code: * the user of the library should now, when library functions are non- pure and hence bound-fn is necessary for a new thread. Dynamic Vars have a high correlation with side-effects. So making such things sufficiently ugly (but not too ugly) helps to make you aware of side-effects and keep them apart of the (hopefully existing) functional core. There are already examples where only non-side- effecting functions are allowed: in transactions, as validators, ... Does this make sense? Sincerely Meikel --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
