On 7 December 2014 at 01:13, Andy L <core.as...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thanks for looking into that. This indeed would solve a "semantics" > problem of memoize, as it returns a value now. However, it seems that > clojure.core.memoize, > or rather clojure.core.cache memoize is based of, is not thread safe. > > It uses ConcurrentHashMap's "put" under the hood, instead of atomic > "putIfAbsent". I might be completely wrong here though. >
The SoftCache uses a ConcurrentHashMap, but that caching option isn't used in core.memoize. Are you building a custom memoizer? - James -- 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 unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
