update! is of my own making, based on assoc! and update-in On Nov 5, 7:30 pm, B Smith-Mannschott <bsmith.o...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 17:38, pepijn (aka fliebel) > > > > > > > > > > <pepijnde...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I will have a look around. > > > I listed the map I used in my first email, It's on my Dropbox: > >http://dl.dropbox.com/u/10094764/World2.zip > > > Meanwhile I wrote a function that is already twice as fast as I had, > > no memory problems, no threads. One tinny problem: it doesn't produce > > the same result. > > > It's the one at the top:https://gist.github.com/663096 > > > The other day I found out that this kind of logic will actually refer > > to the same same transient. This eliminates the remainder and associng > > in the areduce fn second in the list, but I'm not sure this is > > reliable, and it might be the reason why some results get lost. > > (defn freqs [^bytes blocks] > (loop [idx 0 > ret (cycle (repeatedly 128 #(transient {})))] > (if (< idx (alength blocks)) > (do > (update! (first ret) (aget blocks idx) (fnil inc 0)) > (recur (inc idx) (next ret))) > (map persistent! (take 128 ret))))) > > I'm not familiar with incanter, which defines update!, but the update! > call makes me suspicious. Transients are not designed to be banged on > in place. That would explain your losing results. > > // ben
-- 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
