brian.goetz at oracle.com
Mon Feb 18 15:46:04 PST 2013
See earlier posting on "reducing reduce." Two reasons:
- People find it confusing -- they want to know why they have to
specify two functions that "do the same thing." (Because they are
thinking sequentially.) And that confusion then infects all the reduce
- The cases where it has an advantage over either map+reduce or
collect seem to be somewhat limited. And, due to lots of accidental
complexity reasons, often involve a fair amount of object creation
overhead, which starts to eat into the potential performance advantage.
So through the combination of "few people will use it, but it confuses
everyone", it seems a reasonable candidate for pruning.
On 2/18/2013 6:34 PM, Joe Bowbeer wrote:
> Maybe I'm confused.
> Why are you now trying to eliminate it?
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 3:20 PM, Brian Goetz <brian.goetz at oracle.com
> <mailto:brian.goetz at oracle.com>> wrote:
> 2. Why don't we have a parallel fold (map+combine) like Rich Hickey
> added to Clojure?
> I'm confused -- the 3-arg reduce was directly inspired by Rich's
> Reducers work?
More information about the lambda-libs-spec-experts