That's correct. That is why Clojure/core hasn't prioritized this work.
Cheers,
Aaron Bedra
--
Clojure/core
http://clojure.com
On 08/25/2011 08:37 AM, Meikel Brandmeyer (kotarak) wrote:
Hi,
Disclaimer: I have no clue whatsoever about the low-level JVM stuff.
I remember Rich saying in one of his talks/interviews, that
invokedynamic is not very interesting for Clojure and that Clojure
won't really benefit from it. I'm far from understanding these things.
So details on what's improved would be very interesting, I guess.
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
--
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
