Thanks for sharing this. I found the write-up to be very informative and to have good background sources.
I certainly never thought about this sneaky behavior concerning `seq` and hash sets before now. I'll have to look out for that one! On Tuesday, April 21, 2015 at 8:13:48 PM UTC-5, Andy Fingerhut wrote: > > I had come across the issue of Clojure hash sets that contain the same set > of elements returning their elements in different orders from each other, > depending upon which order they were added to the set (only if they have > equal values for (hash x)). > > This and other questions on referential transparency on the Clojure group > got me thinking on my commutes about it some more, and I dug into it way > more than I expected to, and wrote up an article on it. If you think such > a topic would interest you, you can read more about it here: > > > https://github.com/jafingerhut/thalia/blob/master/doc/other-topics/referential-transparency.md > > Guaranteed at least 99% epiphany free > > Andy > > -- 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.
