On Sunday, February 24, 2013 4:27:34 PM UTC+1, Geo wrote: > At the moment I don't find the Clojure solution simple, but again this may > simply be to lack of exposure. Have you written a lot of performance > optimized Clojure? >
Yes, that's the catch, isn't it? If we had to write Clojure in the performant idiom all the time, Clojure wouldn't exactly be an appealing language. So, by definition almost, happy Clojure users are inexperienced in writing performant Clojure. There is also something about diminishing returns here: you need to learn a *lot* of minute particularities just to be able to write that one key function. -- -- 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 --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
