Hey,
So yesterday we discussed concurrency at our meetup
(http://www.meetup.com/Budapest-Clojure-User-Group/) and a question occurred to
me.
Suppose we have a classic web application. (I'm not currently building such a
web app in Clojure, so that's a "theoretical" question).
When the user si
mpted and if the side-effect
> action itself fails then the transaction rolls back like always.
>
> On Wednesday, February 20, 2013 9:32:14 AM UTC-5, Balint Erdi wrote:
>>
>> Hey,
>>
>> So yesterday we discussed concurrency at our meetup (
>> http://www.meetup.
Hey,
I got an assignment to implement an algorithm to calculate strongly
connected components in a graph (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosaraju's_algorithm). The graph is rather
big, it has ~900.000 vertices.
In its first pass, it needs to do a depth-first search on the graph and
calcula
30 seconds.
On Thursday, March 28, 2013 2:22:44 AM UTC+1, Stephen Compall wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 10:37 -0700, Balint Erdi wrote:
> > (let [neighbors (persistent!
> >(reduce
> > (fn [
;s).
>
> On Thursday, March 28, 2013 12:06:45 PM UTC+1, Balint Erdi wrote:
>>
>> Yes, that's definitely a good idea. I tried a few other things (including
>> that, I think) after I posted that but nothing really worked and it turned
>> out that the tail-recursive
Hey,
AFAIK the clojure reducers library gains its performance boost since the
underlying JVM can make use of multiple cores. I wonder how this changes
with Javascript being the platform. Don't JS engines have a single
execution thread?
Balint
On Thursday, June 28, 2012 11:47:46 PM UTC+2, Davi
, Las wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> using the reducers library also eliminates the per-step allocation of
> temporary results when the processing code is composed of multiple
> functions, AFAIK.
>
> Las
>
> 2012/7/4 Balint Erdi
>
>> Hey,
>>
>> AFAIK the clojur
This is the classic Subset sum problem
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subset_sum_problem) and is an NP one.
I've implemented the pseudo-polynomial dynamic programming solution found
on the above Wikipedia page:
https://gist.github.com/3359504
It returns the indexes of the elements that give the
I'd like to read that thread, can you provide a url?
Thank you,
Balint
On Saturday, August 25, 2012 2:41:40 AM UTC+2, Bost wrote:
>
> See the thread "The Value of Values" started by Conrad Barski
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To
Hey,
When browsing through clojure.core I noticed something peculiar in the
implementation of comp, juxt and partial.
All three share the same implementation pattern. They define separate methods
for the arity of 0,1,2,3 and any.
For example in juxt:
(defn juxt
(…)
([f g]
(fn
Makes sense but why don't we have it in all possible places then?
Thank you.
On Tuesday, October 2, 2012 9:55:42 PM UTC+2, Herwig Hochleitner wrote:
>
> That is because dispatch on argument count is fast, while apply is slow.
> Especially so since it might have to create an intermediate seq.
> I
gt; My guess is that it's useful in the core functions which are more
> heavily used. Otherwise you're getting into premature optimization if
> you use it in any of your own functions without profiling it first.
>
> On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 4:18 PM, Balint Erdi >
> wro
If you share your pc with your brother then using the classic one
username/password per site you'd have to log out and back in on each site
you want to use (or use another browser/incognito window, etc.)
With Persona you only have to do this once.
On Sunday, October 28, 2012 9:05:20 PM UTC+1, S
Hey,
I've grown extremely enthusiastic about Clojure (and still growing more and
more :) ) and would like to spread the love around here in Budapest,
Hungary.
This is to estimate how many people are interested in attending a monthly
meetup where we'd have presentations, code dojos, etc, so ple
As Sean suggested you should use doseq instead of for and map to force
side-effects:
http://clojuredocs.org/clojure_core/clojure.core/doseq
Since doseq uses the exact same syntax as for, you should just write doseq
in its place. map should be converted to doseq syntax, too.
Balint
On Monday, D
Hey,
Reducers is fascinating and quite complex at the same time. I feel like
"best practices" around it has not quite solidified yet.
Here is how I made your example work:
(ns group-by-reducers.core
(:require [clojure.core.reducers :as r :only [fold reduce map]])
(:require [criterium.core :
BTW I understood the most about reducers (still not quite there yet, though
:) ) from Rich Hickey's talk at EuroClojure:
https://vimeo.com/45561411
On Friday, December 7, 2012 10:21:59 AM UTC+1, Balint Erdi wrote:
>
> Hey,
>
> Reducers is fascinating and quite complex at the
; "Elapsed time: 518.502 msecs"
>>> Run 3
>>> "Elapsed time: 673.108 msecs"
>>> "Elapsed time: 745.688 msecs"
>>> "Elapsed time: 542.837 msecs"
>>> Run 4
>>> "Elapsed time: 654.196 msecs"
>>
Hey,
Delighted to announce that the Budapest Clojure Group has just launched:
http://www.meetup.com/Budapest-Clojure-User-Group/
The official language is English so consider joining/attending if you're
from a relatively close city but don't speak Hungarian (Bratislava & Vienna
come to mind).
Great, just sent the pull request.
On Friday, January 11, 2013 at 4:03 PM, Michael Klishin wrote:
> 2013/1/11 Balint Erdi mailto:balint.e...@gmail.com)>
> > Delighted to announce that the Budapest Clojure Group has just launched:
> >
> > http://www.meetup.com/Bud
20 matches
Mail list logo
