> At first this surprised me, since Clojure is dynamically typed, while > F# is statically typed. After some thought, however, it occurred to me > that Clojure can generate code very similar to statically typed > languages using type hints. Of course, as soon as you add type hints, > the code is no longer dynamically typed, but rather statically type. > You lose the ability to do duck-typing on the arguments to a function. > It would be more fair to compare Clojure to Scala. F# does not run on the same VM.
> For those cases where performance is more important than flexibility, > Clojure offers an advantage over "traditional" dynamic languages > (Ruby, Python, etc.) in that the programmer can choose. > Clojure also offers an alternative to the full duck-typing/reflection scheme while being more dynamic than interface: protocols. As many LISPs, it offers dynamicity with possible static typing optimization when it is useful. -- 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
