On 30 May 2011 02:02, Ken Wesson <kwess...@gmail.com> wrote: > I don't think either is non-idiomatic, but I'd probably just use the > map. It's shorter and simpler code, more widely interoperable with > other Clojure facilities, and the member access speedup using a record > is unlikely to matter much in code that is blocked on I/O nearly all > of the time anyway.
Some very good points. I've decided to remove the record and go with a map for now. - James -- 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
