vals
iex(5)> list1 = [1,2,3]
[1, 2, 3]
iex(6)> list2 = [4 | list1]
[4, 1, 2, 3]
I am trying to imagine how immutability works in Elixir (and in other functional languages).
When line 6 is executed there will be no new list data structure created but both list1 and list2 will refer to the same underline data structure. Is it correct assumtion???
Trending in Questions
I’m aware of 2 such projects, are there others?
git: GitHub - team-alembic/realworld: A fullstack Phoenix LiveView application with back...
New
I having some trouble figuring out if I have set myself too strict of standards for my production server. Currently I can handle 75% of r...
New
Hi everyone.
My team and I have been working on a fairly modest app based around video streaming and chat, but we’ve landed a customer t...
New
I really like the adapter patterns that ecto, nebulex, waffle, etc. use and would love find something similar for a key management servic...
New
Hello folks!
So at work, we are seeing some situations where we have to define some “fixed” strings that are used across the codebase in...
New
How Can I Optimise Compile Time Dependencies
I have been building an elixir application for about 2 years now. Many modules and files ha...
New
Other Trending Topics
A little off-topic, but I feel like people here have a good head on their shoulders.
I used to be quite good at making software. Was luc...
New
Hey. Is there anyone here who creates agents in their apps? Not talking about using agents, but creating them. I’m finding it pretty diff...
New
I fully migrated to my own harness from Anthropic/Gemini and I think it’s time to share it. Welcome DSH, the DeepSeek Harness, fully writ...
New
Beam Bots (or just BB for short) is a framework for building fault-tolerant robotics applications in Elixir using familiar OTP patterns. ...
New
There has been a thread to discuss the Stack Overflow Developer Survey on this forum every year since 2018, so here’s yet another one for...
New
I love Elixir. It’s one of 2 programming languages I’ve ever fallen in love with.
But I don’t use it anymore.
Serverless was the promis...
New
Categories:
Sub Categories:
Forums
Popular Tags
- #ecto
- #liveview
- #troubleshooting
- #learning-elixir
- #library
- #deployment
- #erlang
- #testing
- #genserver
- #mix
- #absinthe
- #remote-other
- #otp
- #plug
- #how-to-question
- #macros
- #postgres
- #elixirconf
- #channels
- #exunit
- #discussion
- #code-sync
- #podcasts
- #javascript
- #onsite
- #dialyzer
- #docker
- #authentication
- #ai
- #umbrella
- #full-time-contract
- #podcasts-by-brainlid
- #ecto-query
- #blog-post
- #elixirconf-us
- #elixir-ls
- #phoenix_html
- #iex
- #graphql
- #genstage
- #websockets
- #supervisor
- #advent-of-code
- #distillery
- #processes
- #elixirconf-eu
- #api
- #forms
- #security
- #metaprogramming











Showing Posts 1 to 3- Show Best Posts
- Show All (oldest first)
- Show All (newest first)
gregvaughn
Yes. In your example you’ll have a single linked list in memory, but the different variables will point to different head elements of it. Since it is a singly linked list there is no way from the
list1variable to ever go “backwards” and see element “4”.In a general hand-wavey sense, this is how a lot of data structures work in immutable languages. You basically have one large/combined structure and different variables have different visibility to parts of it.
vals
However, ignoring the under-the-hood implementation, the end user of the language should be under the impression that a brand new copy of the list is created. The particular implementation shown is just a trick for the sake of efficiency.
Joseph
I’m not so sure that it’s about copying as much as it is that immutability gives us the effect that it’s like copying. As you say, it’s like that underneath for efficiency, but the interesting thing is that if we have immutable data then we don’t have to copy underneath: we know that pointing to different parts of the data (from different variables) won’t give us a different value at different times.