My suggestion of a bitmask was just a response to a suggestion of prime factorization for encoding roles in an integer. I think using a set is just fine. The space requirements for a small set of keywords is negligible in the larger scheme of things. It also permits more readable code (always a good thing) with bits of code that need to interact with it.
On Thursday, October 13, 2016 at 7:56:10 AM UTC-4, Torsten Uhlmann wrote: > > It might be premature optimization, or you could view it as a different > approach, for a different usage scenario. > I'm myself pretty content with the literal approach, we're using this in a > fairly large application and haven't experienced any problems with regards > of performance or amount of data attached to users so far. > > On the other hand I see these suggestions as a way to experiment with > alternative approaches, which might as well teach me something... > > Stefan Kamphausen <ska...@gmail.com <javascript:>> schrieb am Do., 13. > Okt. 2016 um 10:29 Uhr: > >> Hi, >> >> Doesn't that feel like premature optimization to you, too? Bitmasks are >> much harder to read than sets with spelled out roles and I wonder if the >> performance gain is really worth that. And it poses a limit of 64 roles. I >> have seen several enterprise applications that had far more than 64 roles >> and/or permissions. >> >> Or am I missing something here? >> >> Just my 2ct. >> >> Kind regards, >> Stefan >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> Groups "Clojure" group. >> To post to this group, send email to clo...@googlegroups.com >> <javascript:> >> Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with >> your first post. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> clojure+u...@googlegroups.com <javascript:> >> 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+u...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > -- 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.
