transducers

Or you can get laziness via sequence (although there are some differences in what that means with transducers).

Are transducers necessary in Clojure because functions of function of functions (etc...) on immutable data structures execute slowly?

And this changes everything because `request(n)` and `cancel()` have asynchronous behavior, very much unlike the step function in transducers.

Although truth be told for such cases there isn't much that the transducers stuff can do.

They say that the challenge for acoustic energy transfer will be in developing the high power transducers that will be needed.

Back-pressure is therefore automatic (and implicit) with pull-based channels (that transducers can be applied to).

Therefore, transducers simply take an additional argument: the next reduction function that should be applied.

I might be wrong, I'd love to see how people can implement this stuff on top of transducers.

He just claimed that some aspects of transducers are difficult to represent as types.

To get laziness back: (sequence (map inc) [1 2]) Transducers are not reducing functions, they return reducing functions when applied to reducing functions.

So you can compose together the transducers of list processing operations, which are then put into effect inside a single reduce, and the behavior is like the composition of the original list processors.

Re rx: several people have already implemented the use of transducers with Rx.

Transducers wrap the functions then pass the data through, allowing full-laziness (or not if you want) by default.

Transducers are part of cultural drive of the Clojure community to identify common patterns and simplify design.

Transducers are about creating reducers that can be used on arbitrary collection-like things.