On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Carson <c.sci.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Don't buy it. That's the whole point of BigInt contagion. If fact and foo > > are correctly written this will work. > > BigInt contagion doesn't help if in some convoluted manner a BigInt's > value is used to construct a primitive sufficiently large that later > causes an overflow. > > > I would like to see that in real examples. And not in something that tend to be mainly a program that crunch numbers. (I think a program "about numbers" could take a bit of complexity to handle numbers. If you write a program to that generates web page, you agree to have an html library and not have "every structure in clojure is html".) On the other hand, programs that have few number computations - mainly to handle a few stats and indices - but that are spread in a lot of code (I think most program are like that) should benefit from good performance without annotating all the code. -- 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
