I tried out the new code last night and it worked perfectly. Thanks!
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Rich Hickey wrote:
>
>
>
> On Feb 7, 9:36 pm, Jeffrey Straszheim
> wrote:
> > With the help of the IRC folks I solved my own problem.
> >
> > I thought I'd share my findings:
> >
> > You canno
Good. This one concerned me, as I'd like to use pmap given its simplicity,
but that would prevent other from calling my code in their own pmap (and how
would they know not to do that).
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Rich Hickey wrote:
>
>
>
> On Feb 7, 9:36 pm, Jeffrey Straszheim
> wrote:
> >
On Feb 7, 9:36 pm, Jeffrey Straszheim
wrote:
> With the help of the IRC folks I solved my own problem.
>
> I thought I'd share my findings:
>
> You cannot safely call pmap inside of another pmap function. Because
> pmap is implemented on top of agents, the actual calls to your
> function are a
With the help of the IRC folks I solved my own problem.
I thought I'd share my findings:
You cannot safely call pmap inside of another pmap function. Because
pmap is implemented on top of agents, the actual calls to your
function are agent sends. When a send happens *inside* of another
agent f
