On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 5:34 PM, Phil Hagelberg wrote:
>
> fft1976 writes:
>
>> P.S. The moderators (Chouser) are now censoring my posts, so if you
>> don't see this message on the list as well, I wrote something they are
>> trying to suppress.
>
> The question you're avoiding is if they're suppr
oops. /aloud/allowed :)
On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 5:59 PM, e wrote:
> Well, by claiming that clojure is fast, you are making an invitation for
> people to try it and see. If they report otherwise and back it up, that
> should be ok. I'm not sure if that's the case, here, but
Well, by claiming that clojure is fast, you are making an invitation for
people to try it and see. If they report otherwise and back it up, that
should be ok. I'm not sure if that's the case, here, but I, for one, have a
concern that if we're only aloud to say nice things in he
fft1976 writes:
> P.S. The moderators (Chouser) are now censoring my posts, so if you
> don't see this message on the list as well, I wrote something they are
> trying to suppress.
The question you're avoiding is if they're suppressing you because
you're too "edgy" or just because you're confro
Of
course. That's the point. Makes perfect sense, too.
On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 4:34 PM, fft1976 wrote:
>
>
>
> On Aug 15, 2:00 am, Meikel Brandmeyer wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Am 14.08.2009 um 02:56 schrieb fft1976:
> >
> > > With type hints, you ca
On Aug 15, 2:00 am, Meikel Brandmeyer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Am 14.08.2009 um 02:56 schrieb fft1976:
>
> > With type hints, you can get Java (?) code to run EXACTLY the same
> > speed as Java, so Clojure is FAST.
>
> I think there is a simple misunderstanding here.
&g
