On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 9:54 AM, Laurent PETIT <laurent.pe...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2010/12/22 Jeff Palmucci <jpalmu...@gmail.com> >> >> I've worked around this sort of thing in the past by wrapping the >> initialization in a closure. My macros: > > Couldn't just it be a wrap with (let [] ), and let the choice of running it > once or not by choosing either def or defonce :
If the workarounds mentioned actually work (I haven't tried) I really don't understand why. This *looks* like a genuine bug to me, but I really don't know Clojure's internals well enough (yet) to be able to have the slightest hint where to start looking. I don't see any reason why (reduce + (range <largenumber>)) should take so much memory. -- Chris Riddoch -- 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
