given the amount of
indirection that goes on when calling everything through the IFn interface.
On Saturday, June 30, 2012 5:30:02 PM UTC-7, Brian Marick wrote:
>
> In its optimization, does the Clojure compiler ever assume idempotency?
> That is, does it ever look at a function appli
You should then use memoize explicitly then. Of course, avoid this if
you have side effects in the function.
Luc
> In its optimization, does the Clojure compiler ever assume idempotency? That
> is, does it ever look at a function application `(f x y z)` and say to itself
> &quo
In its optimization, does the Clojure compiler ever assume idempotency? That
is, does it ever look at a function application `(f x y z)` and say to itself
"I may freely substitute the result of the first application of `f` to those
particular arguments for any later call"?
I could
