Hey,
I'm actually surprised you get to "stop" at all. You send a couple items
onto the channel but don't close it, therefore the 2nd go block will
potentially block forever waiting for more.
I'm far from an expert in core.async but I think the solution would be to
close! the channel and as a suggestion: (go) blocks themselves return
channels that "block" until they are completed. You could write this as:
(time
(let [c (chan 100)]
(go
(dotimes [i 100000]
(>! c i))
(close! c))
;; go and wait for its result
(<!! (go
(while (<! c))
:done))))
HTH,
/thomas
On Friday, November 29, 2013 5:08:52 AM UTC+1, kandre wrote:
>
> Hi there,
> I've started playing with core.async but I am not sure if I'm using it the
> way it was intended to.
> Running a simple benchmark with two go-blocks (one writing an event to a
> channel, the other one reading it out) seems quite slow:
>
> (time (let [c (chan 100) stop (chan)]
> (go
> (dotimes [i 100000]
> (>! c i)))
> (go
> (while (<! c))
> (>! stop true))
> (<!! stop)))
>
> "Elapsed time: 1226.072003ms"
>
> I presume the way I am using core.async is fundamentally flawed so I'd be
> greatful if someone would point it out to me.
>
> Cheers
> Andreas
>
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Clojure" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
