crunch-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gabriel Reid <gabriel.r...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Process of CombineFn<S,T> returns <S,U>?
Date Sun, 20 Oct 2013 17:29:47 GMT
On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 6:05 PM, Gabriel Reid <gabriel.reid@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The only use case I can see where using a different underlying
> combiner implementation would be useful is if the instantiation of
> U is very costly, and so we don't want to create a new U for every single
> V. I can envision any situation where this would actually be the case, so
> it doesn't seem worth doing it like this (until this use case comes up).
>

And now just after writing this and thinking about it, I realize that
this isn't even feasible -- a combiner's operation must be
commutative, and converting from V to U isn't commutative, so it's not
even technically feasible. So yet more reason to not try to do
anything tricky here.

- Gabriel

Mime
View raw message