On Jul 2, 2009, at 10:36, Daniel Lyons wrote: > This is one reason I am not a big fan of > comparing the speed of languages; another is that it often changes out > from under you. Java itself is a great example of this: by the time > everyone had gotten the message that it was slow, it had already > become reasonably fast. The code that was to take the most advantage > of the improvements was that which was written plainly and clearly > rather than doing a lot of legwork to circumvent performance issues, > and this is always the case. Clojure's young.
I agree. I don't think discussing Clojure's performance vs. language X is very productive in general, and certainlyl not at this moment. The implementation is young, and so is the community's experience with efficient coding style. Two more interesting questions are 1) What are good strategies to get the best performance out of Clojure? 2) How can the current implementation (compiler + runtime library) be improved? Konrad. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
