No you didn't misinterpret it, I thought that would have been the cause. I ran a test and I think the de-structuring might have something to do with it. Here's the test:
(defn count-slow [[x & xs] acc] (if (empty? xs) (inc acc) (recur xs (inc acc)))) (defn count-fast [xs acc] (if (empty? (rest xs)) (inc acc) (recur (rest xs) (inc acc)))) (time (count-fast (range 1E8) 0)) "Elapsed time: 48769.773688 msecs" 100000000 (time (count-slow (range 1E8) 0)) "Elapsed time: 88276.491181 msecs" 100000000 (time (count (range 1E8))) "Elapsed time: 33762.022887 msecs" 100000000 Still doesn't explain the >3-fold difference though. I included count there out of curiosity, don't have time to look at the code at work, but I am now intrigued by how it improves on my version :) Cheers -- 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
