On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 08:28:43PM -0800, David Brown wrote: >In both cases, the reads run completely synchronously, waiting for >their answer, and really the whole thing isn't really any better than >just using locks.
I guess a deeper concern is that there seems to only be a single call in the entire Clojure concurrency system: 'await'. One very useful extension GHC adds to STM is the 'retry' call, which causes the transaction to retry, but it blocks until something else modifies one of the refs that it has read. It allows any arbitrary concurrency to be implemented, since now a thread can wait for a result, for example. Should I just be less afraid of using the Java concurrency classes? David --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
