On 6/24/12 10:31 PM, Christian M. wrote:
I think the only problem (if it is a problem at all), which won't be
solved soon is ClojureScript's performance resulting from creating a
lot of implicit objects in very high level computations. Something
like (filter (map (reduce ... ... (map ...)))) can't be as fast and as
memory-efficient for loops and in-place array operations of JS. In
theory, the same holds for Clojure and Java as well, however, in
contrast to ClojureScript, I never faced this problem on JVM yet.
Does the new reducers library[1] work in ClojureScript? One of its
advantages is that it avoids the per-step allocation overhead that you
are mentioning with the chain of filters/maps/reduce calls.
-Ben
1.
http://clojure.com/blog/2012/05/08/reducers-a-library-and-model-for-collection-processing.html
--
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
