Yes. Concerned about making future work, less concerned about hypothetical examples. :-) The "I know I don't need what I closed over ever again" case can be solved on a per-occurrence basis where it matters.
Stu > On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 3:06 PM, Stuart Halloway > <stuart.hallo...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Chouser, >> >> There is now a ticket and roadmap for fixing this: See >> https://www.assembla.com/spaces/clojure/tickets/423-make-sure-future-clears-closed-overs. > > Did you see that my examples didn't use future at all? > > --Chouser > http://joyofclojure.com/ > > -- > 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 -- 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
