@alexmiller re: https://dev.clojure.org/jira/browse/CLJ-1326, the selected method in the example was not really the point, if you do any interop over literal collections you'll get the same behavior

for example interop for the java.util.Collection methods which the clojure collections are documented to implement (https://clojure.org/reference/data_structures)

Just wondering, about the naming for async-require, since it's basically require+locking, wouldn't another name be more appropriate?

I'll leave a comment

async-foo tends to suggest something is done asynchronously, I'd argue sync-require would be more appropriate actually, but that's just me

surprisingly

user=> (instance? java.util.Collection {})
false

seems like maps don't implement j.u.C, possibly an oversight but that goes against the docs, I'll make a ticket about it

Java collections do not include maps

so that’s normal

Map is a separate hierarchy

https://dev.clojure.org/jira/browse/CLJ-2441

well then the docs are incorrect

which?

https://clojure.org/reference/data_structures

>In addition, the collections: >Implement the non-optional (read-only) portion of java.util.Collection

then yes, I’d say that’s incomplete

I would add “or java.util.Map”

I've reworded the ticket to suggest the docs might be incomplete instead of the impl being incorrect

docs updated, ticket closed

ty