My best guess would be that I've used the loop version in places where I
had (set! *unchecked-math* true) - I see that dotimes uses unchecked-inc so
that might explain it. See what happens with this version.
(defn inplace-xor [^bytes a ^bytes b ^bytes out]
(let [len (alength a)]
(loop [i 0]
(when (< i len)
(aset-byte out i (bit-xor (aget a i) (aget b i)))
(recur (*unchecked-*inc i))))))
As someone mentions later in this thread, it really pays to read the
compiled bytecode for this stuff and check for boxing.
On Thursday, March 13, 2014 7:39:01 AM UTC-5, Michael Gardner wrote:
>
> On Mar 13, 2014, at 07:34 , Alex Miller <[email protected]<javascript:>>
> wrote:
>
> > Agreed with all the comments on this so far. I would also say that
> dotimes is slower than loop for stuff like this so I would also make that
> change.
>
> The dotimes version is slightly faster on my hardware. Why would it be
> slower?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
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 [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
