Yes I have patched destructuring, http://goo.gl/Xc23p , and I use #[] for both tuple creation and destructuring, see example in my earlier message.
Type hinting could be a nicer solution, I've never thought of it. Will try. JW On Tuesday, January 1, 2013 1:40:50 AM UTC+1, Brandon Bloom wrote: > > > Significant performance gain is achieved when destructuring by skipping > nth and directly calling type fields instead. > > Have you also patched the destructuring mechanism? > > > Concrete vector implementation is not known when destructuring, so I'm > left with a custom reader literal. > > How does the reader literal affect the site of destructuring? Are you also > using the #[] literal for the destructure target? ie: > > (let [#[x y] #[1 2]] ...) > > If so, then wouldn't to make more sense to rely on type hints? > > (let [[x y] ^Tuple2 (tuple 1 2)] ...) > > I guess, potentially, you could rely on the explicit vector type for small > literals: > > (let [[x y] ^Vec2 [1 2]] ...) > > But that seems like a bad idea.... > -- 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
