I really don't know, as I know very little about how these things are implemented. My point is, we maintain a coherent abstraction and get the best speed we can. To recap, what I don't like about current "last" is it makes writing generic code difficult. Currently, I need to use "peek" for vector and "last" for sequence. That defeats the very purpose of abstraction.
On Friday, June 29, 2012 7:42:14 PM UTC-4, David Nolen wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 6:49 PM, Warren Lynn <wrn.l...@gmail.com> wrote: > > The same? If internally it can be faster, be faster. If not, don't > change. > > For which types do you think they can be made faster? > > 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
