Hi, On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 05:39:37PM -0400, Douglas Philips wrote:
> Stuart's comment was to not use seq-contains? on maps or sets. > There is no reason that it cannot be the same speed as contains? if > a set or map is passed in. Ah, ok. I misunderstood what you were saying. But I think it doesn't change the argumentation. If seq-contains? was fast on maps and sets, people would abandon contains? because seq-contains? is "always right": works on seqs, fast on maps and sets. And again we are in the situation, that the developer does not make his intentions explicit. 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
