Well, you can always use the (time) macro and pick what runs faster: (dorun (map some-fn-with-side-effects sequence-1 sequence-2))
(doseq [x (map some-fn-with-side-effects sequence-1 sequence-2))]) (doseq) could be faster in some cases because its implementation uses chunked sequences. Now, (doseq) can take multiple sequences, but that may not be what you want: user=> (doseq [x '(1 2) y '(3 4)] (println x y)) 1 3 1 4 2 3 2 4 On Jan 23, 3:51 am, joachim <joachim.de.be...@gmail.com> wrote: > First: Thanks all for your thoughts. > > Second: I have the same question as Allen (why would the doseq variant > be faster in this case?) > > Finally: so I guess that what I did was also OK then? > > Jm > > On Jan 20, 9:57 pm, Alan Malloy <a...@malloys.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > But I don't see any reason why this would be faster than (dorun (map > > side-effect-fn s1 s2 s3)). You're creating and then dismantling a > > three-element vector at every iteration to no purpose. > > > On Jan 20, 12:40 pm, Meikel Brandmeyer <m...@kotka.de> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > to add to Lars answer: > > > > (doseq [[a b c] (map vector s1 s2 s3)] > > > (side-effect-fn a b c)) > > > > This should do the trick. > > > > 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
