In that case, why aren't eductions just lazy sequences? On Monday, 9 May 2016 16:07:55 UTC-7, Alex Miller wrote: > > eductions are non-caching (will re-perform their work each time they are > used), so most of the time I would say lazy sequences are preferable. > > On Monday, May 9, 2016 at 4:54:48 PM UTC-5, JvJ wrote: >> >> In a similar vein, do you think that eductions are generally a better >> idea than lazy sequences/for comprehensions? >> >> On Sunday, 8 May 2016 22:24:15 UTC-7, Herwig Hochleitner wrote: >>> >>> My theory has been, that transducer stacks inline much better, hence >>> allow for more optimizations by the jit. >>> In particular I suspect that escape analysis works better on them, so >>> the compiler can even move some of the remaining allocations to the stack. >>> >>> To verify this, try running with -verbose:gc and with either >>> -XX:-DoEscapeAnalysis then -XX:+DoEscapeAnalysis >>> >>>
-- 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/d/optout.
