Hi, On Aug 12, 12:44 pm, Tayssir John Gabbour <tayssir.j...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Ok, so a function like + avoids this boxing, because it's really > replaced by a call to clojure.lang.Numbers.add()... And looking at the > sourcecode, this is accomplished through :inline. This :inline > declaration allows + to avoid IFn's rules, because + disappears after > compiletime. > > If correct, that makes sense. I think, this is what's going on. That also explains why (+ 1 2 3) is slow, while (+ (+ 1 2) 3) is fast. The first goes the usual route for function invocation, ie. boxing is required, while the second gets inlined and the fast path via c.l.Numbers is used. Sincerely Meikel --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
