Hi, Am 16.12.2011 um 12:17 schrieb Cedric Greevey:
> You *already* can't change the type signature of an optimized function > without needing to recompile its callers. But once you settled on a type signature, you have the usual fast benchmark,optimize,reload-cycle. Without interfaces you don't even have that. So it is worse in a sense. > Hasn't posting this discussion here "advanced the discussion"? Or are > even verbal suggestions not considered by the developers unless they > come from someone with a CA? If the latter, I'd suggest that that's > rather silly, only presumably said suggestion would promptly fall on > deaf ears. :) Posting this discussion certainly “advanced the discussion.” But an email thread only gets you so far. Details get lost deeply in the response tree or are spread over several messages. At some point, the thread has to be distilled into some summary of discussion, outlining the motivation why this is needed, what the different implementation approaches are, their pros and cons, the alternatives, etc. The developers are certainly not deaf for suggestions, but providing them a summary is certainly in everyone's interest. I'd certainly prefer Rich and Co. to work on Clojure rather than wading through a long email thread. 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
