http://dev.clojure.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&jqlQuery=project+%3D+CLJ+AND+resolution+%3D+Unresolved+AND+assignee+%3D+%22jim.blomo%22+ORDER+BY+priority+DESC An XML representation of a search request en-us 4.4 649 25-07-2011 http://dev.clojure.org/jira/browse/CLJ-248 Clojure <p>Currently we can have a subseq of a sorted-set|map-by, but this returns a seq and<br/> not a Set or Map.<br/> Implementing the interfaces java.util.SortedSet and java.util.SortedMap would give<br/> us support for calling .subSet and .subMap.</p> CLJ-248

Add support for subsets and submaps to sorted Sets/Maps

Enhancement Minor Open Unresolved Jim Blomo None Wed, 27 Jan 2010 05:52:00 -0600 Sat, 2 Jun 2012 19:08:44 -0500 Approved Backlog 0 2 <p>Converted from <a href="http://www.assembla.com/spaces/clojure/tickets/248">http://www.assembla.com/spaces/clojure/tickets/248</a></p> <p>awizzard said: Another nice addition could be <a href="http://java.sun.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/util/NavigableMap.html">java.util.NavigableMap</a>, though this is available only since Java 6.</p> <p>SortedSet-SortedMap-interfaces-248.diff 2012-05-10 is a first pass at the SortedMap interface. If there are no objections, I'll build on the SortedMap implementation to add SortedSet support.</p> <p>SortedMap-interfaces-248.diff 2012-05-10 supersedes the last diff. It implements and tests the SortedMap interface.</p> <p>Additionally it includes tests for `sorted-map`, which didn't seem to be tested yet.</p> <p>SortedMap-SortedSet-interfaces-248.diff 2012-05-18 supersedes the last diff. It implements and tests both SortedMap and SortedSet.</p> <p>(Concurrent)NavigableMap is not implemented because I think 1.5 is still targeted. In any case, it probably should have its own ticket.</p> <p>clj-248-SortedMap-SortedSet-interfaces-patch2.txt dated May 24, 2012 is simply an updated version of SortedMap-SortedSet-interfaces-248.diff dated May 17, 2012. The latter patch no longer applied cleanly.</p> <p>The new patch combines what was internally multiple git commits into one, simply because it was easier for me to create the patch that way. I left out the addition of *.swp and *.swo files to the .gitignore file. Builds and tests cleanly on Oracle/Apple JDK 1.6 on Mac OS X 10.6.8.</p> <p>I don't know why Priority changed to Blocker when I changed Patch to "Code and Test". I didn't try to do that &#8211; suspect that something with the web UI is doing that automatically somehow.</p> <p>Added <a href="http://dev.clojure.org/jira/browse/CLJ-1008" title="Make sorted maps and sets implement j.u.NavigableMap and NavigableSet interfaces ">CLJ-1008</a> for NavigableMap interface enhancement.</p> Global Rank Patch Code and Test http://dev.clojure.org/jira/browse/CLJ-862 Clojure <p>The code of pmap creates futures for the set of map operations it needs to perform with (map #(future %) coll), then acts on that sequence in a fashion obviously intended to keep only #CPUs+2 unfinished futures realized at any given time. It works exactly this way for non-chunked input seqs, but when pmap is passed a chunked seq, the seq of futures also becomes chunked. This causes an arbitrary number of futures to be realized as the #CPUs+2 window and chunk-size window interact.</p> <p>The doc-string for pmap doesn't promise any particular level of parallelism, but I think the inconsistent parallelism for chunked vs non-chunked input comprises a bug.</p> CLJ-862

pmap level of parallelism inconsistent for chunked vs non-chunked input

Defect Minor Open Unresolved Jim Blomo Marshall T. Vandegrift Sun, 23 Oct 2011 09:50:38 -0500 Sat, 20 Oct 2012 00:45:48 -0500 Release 1.1 Release 1.2 Release 1.3 Release 1.4 Reviewed Backlog 0 2 <p>Next person to take a deep look at pmap should probably also think through fork/join.</p> <p>fork/join is a Java 7 feature. Would a proposed patch need to be able to fall back to Java 5 features?</p> <p>Clojure/core folks can say more authoritatively, but I believe with the recent reduce enhancements that rely on jsr166 code, Clojure 1.5 will most likely require Java 6 or later, and Java 5 will no longer be supported.</p> <p>Spinning up more threads than CPU cores is not a good idea when the work is CPU bound. Currently (1.4) pmap uses an unbounded thread pool, so chunked sequences will create more threads than intended. The least invasive change is to use a fixed sized thread pool (ForkJoinPool being one example). pmap is differentiated from core.reducers by the fact that it is lazy. This implies a one-at-a-time ThreadPool.submit model, instead of the recursive fork/join model. Tradeoffs include:</p> <p>Enforce look-ahead even on chunked sequences:</p> <ul class="alternate" type="square"> <li>+ no threadPool changes</li> <li>- working against chunking, which is presumably being used for a reason</li> </ul> <p>Move to a fixed size thread pool:</p> <ul class="alternate" type="square"> <li>+ reduce contention for cpu-bound functions on chunked sequences</li> <li>- increase total realization time for io-bound functions</li> </ul> <p>Use ForkJoinPool for fixed thread pool (instead of newFixedThreadPool):</p> <ul class="alternate" type="square"> <li>+ automatic and dynamic parallelism</li> <li>- more complex setup (picking Java 6 vs 7 implementation, sharing pool with core.reducers)</li> </ul> <p>I think using a traditional fixed size thread pool is the right option. Most of the time all of pmap's results will be realized, so I don't think it's worth saving work by being strict about the look-ahead size. This is also the decision map has made. Since we're not using ForkJoin's main strength (recursive work queuing), I don't think it is worth setting it up in clojure.core.</p> <p>I'll use Agent/pooledExecutor as the fixed size thread.</p> <p>Let me know if I forgot or misunderstood anything.</p> <p>2012-05-28 pmap-chunking-862.diff uses a fixed size thread pool for pmap functions.</p> Global Rank Patch Code and Test http://dev.clojure.org/jira/browse/CLJ-970 Clojure <p>When extending parameterized types, class files can track the original signatures of the superclass and super interfaces so that the original types can be obtained at run time. This runtime reflection is used in some Java frameworks, and implementing it in Clojure can enable interop. See <a href="http://groups.google.com/group/clojure/browse_thread/thread/5efd692804df3f47/1336e591c2eedfa1">http://groups.google.com/group/clojure/browse_thread/thread/5efd692804df3f47/1336e591c2eedfa1</a> for examples of this request.</p> <p>This proposal checks the :parameters keyword in type meta information. If a parameter is found, it is added to the class signature.</p> CLJ-970

extend/implement parameterized types (generics)

Enhancement Minor Open Unresolved Jim Blomo Jim Blomo Tue, 10 Apr 2012 01:33:49 -0500 Fri, 1 Mar 2013 09:46:59 -0600 Release 1.5 1 4 <p>2012-04-14 extend-implement-parameterized-types.diff is the correctly formatted `git format-patch master` for this change. It supersedes clojure-parameterized-generics.diff from 2012-04-10.</p> <p>Patch clj-970-extend-implement-parameterized-types-patch2.txt dated Aug 19 2012 is identical to Jim Blomo's patch extend-implement-parameterized-types.diff dated Apr 14 2012, except it has updated context lines so that it applies cleanly to latest master as of today.</p> Global Rank Patch Code and Test http://dev.clojure.org/jira/browse/CLJ-1004 Clojure <p>I've found it helpful to be able to iterate over ArrayChunks. Implementing Seqable means they can be used by most collections functions.</p> CLJ-1004

ArrayChunk implements Seqable

Enhancement Minor Open Unresolved Jim Blomo Jim Blomo Mon, 28 May 2012 18:53:55 -0500 Mon, 25 Mar 2013 23:10:02 -0500 0 1 <p>2012-05-28 implements the seq method for vec and vector-of. It uses the array backing ArrayChunk to construct a sequence. Simple tests are included.</p> <p>Please add discussion of motivating use cases.</p> <p>This was motivated by the desire to implement chunk-sequence-aware functions in Clojure elegantly. Currently, dealing with ArrayChunks in Clojure is clumsy because few of the functions dealing with collections will work with non-seqables. This functionality will mostly be used by implementers since end users shouldn't care if their sequence is chunked or not.</p> Global Rank Patch Code and Test