> Thanks for the rapid response! You could say that you put this in there as
> an exercise for the viewer; I know that in discussing it amongst ourselves,
> we definitely sharpened our understanding of some of the concepts.
I guess I'd see it as an argument for static checking around
concurrency,
Thanks for the rapid response! You could say that you put this in there as
an exercise for the viewer; I know that in discussing it amongst ourselves,
we definitely sharpened our understanding of some of the concepts.
I had tried submitting an erratum via O’Reilly before posting to this list,
b
Yes, I'm pretty sure that was a quick-and-dirty example, and I probably
should have clarified that in the course.
You are correct, there is a race condition between the go loops, and that
one of them may close the output channel before the others have finished
processing their results. Probably be
We’ve been watching Timothy Baldridge’s great O’Reilly video series on
core.async, but are perplexed by one of the examples. In lecture 14 on
tuning back-pressure, he introduces a function map-pipe for giving a
channel a pipeline of work to do, and then as the final step, adds the
ability to ad
