On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 7:09 PM, David Nolen <dnolen.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > However from > what I've seen the past couple of years, Clojure tends to emphasize > performance while providing acceptable fallbacks for those cases where > people want something more flexible / dynamic. And things are continuing to > move in that direction - not the other way around.
Without any specific code to benchmark, isn't this whole discussion mostly premature optimization? I mean, we're all making assertions about what will be slow and what won't without having anything to actually test. I'd prefer to reserve judgment until someone's got working code to evaluate. Which reminds me, I'd really love to see a good comparison of freely available benchmarking tools for Clojure. From past discussions on the list, I gather that benchmarking in the JVM is a rather tricky thing in general, but much more so for "micro-benchmarking" that this sort of empiricism calls for. -- Chris Riddoch -- 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
