Hi, On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 12:13 PM, Paul Stadig <p...@stadig.name> wrote:
> On Sunday, February 3, 2013 9:56:49 PM UTC-5, puzzler wrote: >> >> In these examples, the map/record is freshly created each time through >> the loop, so caching should not be a factor. >> > > Good point. So maybe it's not the caching :). > No Paul, you were right: it's the caching. The map is seen as constant and its creation is hoisted outside of the loop so hash is called 1e7 times on the same map object. While a new record is created at each iteration. If you rewrite (time (dotimes [n 10000000] (hash (A. "a" 3)))) as (time (dotimes [n 10000000] (hash #user.A["a" 3]))) you get a single record instance -- but still no caching on records. In my patch to fix the hashing caching (or lack of) I didn't cover records because it's more involved: it requires changes to the compiler because we need to add new fields to the record to hold the cached value -- fields that must not be part of the constructor. Christophe -- On Clojure http://clj-me.cgrand.net/ Clojure Programming http://clojurebook.com Training, Consulting & Contracting http://lambdanext.eu/ -- -- 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 --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
