3 ms·
> Either ways seems silly - especially do what you did before but with complex dance around it. Interesting you think that. I think the opposite. It seems si
by tome 12y ago
> Either ways seems silly - especially do what you did before but with complex dance around it.
Interesting you think that. I think the opposite. It seems silly to overwrite something that someone else may have been relying on to not change when I can do a persistent update with pretty much the same performance.
- seanmcdirmid 12y agoConcurrency requires the someone else to see the change. Persistent collections work by throwing out concurrency.
- joe_the_user 12y agoWell, That makes immutability a nice technique if you happen to be dealing with a situation of synchronous access and otherwise an unneeded approach. The topic was haskell as first-language. Despite the hype, most people aren't going to be writing fully synchronous applications most of the time and thus immutability all the time seems mostly like unneeded bondage and discipline programming.