On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 10:28 AM, Rob Lally <rob.la...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If it only makes the non-vector seq case slower, I'd certainly make that an > available option - people are going to have to manually convert other > sequences into vectors anyway which creates a coding overhead and also makes > the code less likely to be JITed. > > On the other hand.. YMMV. > Choosing to support seqs doesn't really make anything else slower. It's about managing expectations - people will use whatever's most convenient. If it performs "badly" then maybe that will be a unpleasant surprise. But then again, maybe it's fast enough that most people don't really care. That people use and enjoy destructuring on seqs is probably a good argument that most people don't care. David -- 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
