first that dinamic languages are better for developers, but you loose some performance compared to typed languages.. and jvm was created with types in mind.. so right now clojure data structures are implemented in java and typed, when you get it in the clojure runtime its boxed already.
theres some good approaches for dinamic languages like trace-jits(notably the new mozilla-javascript and luajit) .. but we are not there yet.. (JSR's was created as lazy sequences .. rsrs) for the immutability you could see you can see the performance gains when you use transients against the immutable data.. i guess it cant compare in with mutable data when you use it sequentially(thats why transients get in the game)... but when you add concurrency to that scenario.. things get better and simpler for us.. :) On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 2:08 AM, Rob Lachlan <robertlach...@gmail.com>wrote: > > for the persistent data.. well all this "laziness" and dinamic types, and > on > > top of that immutability should not perform well in pure clojure.... > > Why? > > -- > 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<clojure%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en > -- 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
