On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 6:10 PM, Tyler Tallman <dspites...@gmail.com> wrote: > By wasting my time I mean if it is clear goog.math.integer is a bad idea it > would be great if someone who knows would help a brother out and tell me. > :-) > I we are slowly moving a large google closure codebase into clojurescript so > I have significantly more experience on the closure side. > goog.math.integer and goog.math.long apear to have about the same > performance characteristics when one of our programmers tested a year and a > half ago. > my naive thought make the bigint cast and use the op' so people realize they > are taking the performance hit.
Send in your CA so you can contribute your thoughts here: http://dev.clojure.org/display/design/Numerics Then I and others can provide specific feedback. I think the best approach would be a solution that first delivers all of Clojure's numerics. Then some thought needs to be put into how it can be implemented without slowing all the persistent data structures down. David -- 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
