great! good to know On Oct 20, 3:21 pm, Rich Hickey <richhic...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Oct 20, 1:34 pm, cej38 <junkerme...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > This question leads into something that I read in Joy of Clojure (page > > 161 in the latest MEAP edition): > > "If you manage to hold onto the head of a sequence somewhere within a > > function, then that sequence will be prevented from being garbage > > collected. The simplest way to retain the head of sequence is to bind > > it to a local. This condition can occur with any type of value bind be > > it to a reference type or through the usage of let or binding." > > > I am not sure what this means, but I think it would mean that using > > let as you do, could cause garbage collection problems. Thus, it > > might be better to follow the advice of Stuart and Luc. > > > Chad > > > PS. Clarification of the statement from the Joy of Clojure would be > > helpful. > > That advice seems stale, given: > > http://groups.google.com/group/clojure/msg/9b4e268b85c20cd6 > > let-bound locals get cleared on last use. > > 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
