> That's very odd. > > Rich needs to take a look at this. Letting a constant shouldn't have a > performance hit, IMO. > > Could you test whether it's faster to use your complex data structure > directly in the function, anonymously at the point of use, or to yank it > from a global var?
Code (can you run it on your computer to verify?): http://clojure.pastebin.com/f508ad31b My results (I've increased N to 100000 and cached random coordinates in vector, to supply the same points to each version of function): "Elapsed time: 2990.418336 msecs" "point-to-hilbert-directly-from-global " nilnil "Elapsed time: 2488.745357 msecs" "point-to-hilbert-let-from-global " nilnil "Elapsed time: 3669.685672 msecs" "point-to-hilbert-literal-in-let " nilnil "Elapsed time: 13039.499434 msecs" "point-to-hilbert-literal-in-place " nilnil With literal in place it is 10 seconds slower. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
