IIRC, Java provides unusual trigonometric functions which, I’m guessing,
Clojure is using. I think the Java ones are actually more accurate (and slower)
so you may well find the answer obtained on the JVM is more precise than the
others.
Cheers,
Jon.
From: clojure@googlegroups.com [m
Do you guys have any concrete examples?
Sent from my iPhone
On 23 Dec 2013, at 10:13, Korny Sietsma wrote:
> This ties in nicely to my summary of how I feel about static typing: Static
> typing is a premature optimisation. Like most optimisations, it has genuine
> value, but if you apply it
allelized Fibonacci functions
and rigged language comparisons.
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups
leverage a static type system to
prove aspects of correctness that remove major classes of bugs from real
applications.
HTH.
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure"
On Thursday 04 February 2010 14:08:44 Sean Devlin wrote:
> Do we have a concise way of doing this? Is it actually useful?
>
> http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=281160
Are you talking about the pattern matching or the "for" loop?
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying F
On Saturday 16 January 2010 18:10:15 Shantanu Kumar wrote:
> The best benefit of Clojure is, I think, the power-to-weight ratio.
That's a really good description for a low barrier to entry. :-)
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
--
You recei
On Saturday 28 November 2009 17:25:58 Daniel Simms wrote:
> Also, I wanted to chime in with something like "we already have
> closures: use Clojure! or Jython, or... So how about TCO?"
Amen, brother.
PS: And value types. ;-)
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consu
On Saturday 28 November 2009 20:58:54 eyeris wrote:
> It's also important to get features into Java if you want real
> substantial JVM performance tuning for them.
Not if they're anything like Microsoft: F#'s closures are much faster
than .NET's closures...
--
requires all of those unnecessary type
definitions and annotations.
Finally, the article failed to mention what is perhaps the single biggest
concern about Scala: it is an academic language. Consequently, Scala will
always be developed toward what is novel and not what is useful. A
creating DSL. Additionally, OCaml's macro system is often used for general
lexing and parsing or arbitrary syntaxes.
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you ar
ulsory static typing (as opposed to optional type hints) into the
> same language does require some careful thought. I haven't seen such a
> combination yet...
I'm not sure what you regard as "Lisp-style" macros but you may be interested
in OCaml's untyped Camlp4
On Monday 13 July 2009 01:55:07 Mark Volkmann wrote:
> Is there another STM implementation that enforces its use like this?
I assume Haskell tells you at compile time.
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com
ified] example.
>
> Personally, I'll wait for Jon Harrop or someone to port the relevant
> Shootout benchmarks or his "Ray tracing" benchmark to Clojure and see
> what time they get and what the code looks like.
That's a fantastic idea! Let's try porting
adation if you cock it up and it is not at all obvious when that might
occur because it depends upon things like where the allocator places your
data. For example, if you have cores mutating global counters then you must
make sure they are spaced out enough in memory that none share cache li
On Thursday 02 July 2009 07:58:11 you wrote:
> I wonder if Jon Harrop is still planning to write Clojure for
> Scientists or Scala for Scientists or both?
I am certainly interested in writing both books. I reviewed Scala back in 2007
and decided that it was not ready to be advocated. P
On Monday 22 June 2009 22:33:24 Stephen C. Gilardi wrote:
> On Jun 22, 2009, at 5:53 PM, Jon Harrop wrote:
> > If that is spawning a new thread every time a future is created then
> > it is
> > really for concurrent programming rather than parallel programming.
>
>
or concurrent programming rather than parallel programming.
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" grou
" operation.
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@
On Sunday 21 June 2009 02:44:02 Kyle Schaffrick wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Jun 2009 11:29:44 +0100
> Jon Harrop wrote:
> > The Task Parallel Library. It uses concurrent wait-free work-stealing
> > queues to provide an efficient implementation of "work items" than
> &g
On Saturday 20 June 2009 08:34:39 Konrad Hinsen wrote:
> On 19.06.2009, at 10:35, Jon Harrop wrote:
> > If you really do mean scientific applications in general (e.g.
> > Mathematica,
> > MATLAB) then I would say that they are definitely almost all
> > running on
>
alent to Microsoft's TPL?
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send ema
& more transparent than accessing C
> from Common Lisp.
And safe! You get an easily-debuggable exception instead of machine-level
errors and silent corruption.
And more efficient because your data is not crossing GC boundaries and
possibly not even changing representation.
--
Dr Jon Harr
uct for it. I've done a lot of
commercial work with F# over the past 2 years but all Microsoft-related sales
have died this year so I'm looking to diversify...
Many thanks,
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.
that I would
identify the bug.
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send
t of being a programmer.
Yes, I can well believe that for many applications.
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Clojur
On Thursday 12 March 2009 00:01:43 James Reeves wrote:
> On Mar 11, 2:31 am, Jon Harrop wrote:
> > > 2. The whole thing does not need to be complete or even functional for
> > > you to start unit testing.
> >
> > Apples and oranges: unit tests are not the same be
productive to have Haskell or a Haskell-like DSL within Clojure if you're
interested in this kind of thing (I have no idea how useful that would
actually be!).
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
--~--~-~--~~~---~-
On Wednesday 11 March 2009 18:35:46 Cosmin Stejerean wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Jon Harrop wrote:
> > Another red herring: you are describing a disadvantage of nominal over
> > structural typing. Not dynamic vs static typing.
>
> You are correct, my apolo
in OCaml and Haskell but they have more advanced static type
system features (e.g. structurally-typed objects and polymorphic variants in
OCaml) that are used to solve the same problems.
The obvious bad examples are Java and C++ and I don't think it is a
coincidence that most of thes
> I know what I want: to pass an object of type B into a function f that
> expects type A, because I know that B is sufficiently A-like to allow
> function f to work.
Another red herring: you are describing a disadvantage of nominal over
structural typing. Not dynamic vs static typing.
On Wednesday 11 March 2009 15:05:39 Konrad Hinsen wrote:
> On Mar 11, 2009, at 3:31, Jon Harrop wrote:
> > Most of the reasons given in this thread were red herrings and many
> > of static
> > typing's real issues were not even touched upon:
>
> ...
>
> I&#x
guages for over
25 years.
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send
e
benefit of proving any kind of correctness because everything they have done
is obvious. Concepts like parametric polymorphism are just mathematics so a
math background helps.
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
--~--~-~--~~--
that are difficult or impossible to easily capture with a static type
> system (e.g., this function takes positive even integers, and returns
> a number from 0 to 9).
While your point is valid your example is not. Specifically, you can easily
imagine a function signature:
uint seq -> digit
pile for me so I have not been able to test
it).
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Clojure" group.
To p
d to build such a common language run-time would
dwarf the effort required to port Clojure to it.
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
On Monday 02 February 2009 19:12:48 David Nolen wrote:
> Please do the list a favor and read the very long threads about
> performance.
I would be interested to see a Clojure port of my ray tracer benchmark:
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/languages/ray_tracer/
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flyin
On Tuesday 03 February 2009 00:39:45 blackdog wrote:
> Hi
>
> If there's anyone in Santiago, Chile, who speaks Clojure and some
> English (my Spanish is not very good) would be good to meet up.
Perhaps a Venn diagram would help. ;-)
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Cons
Apologies if you've seen this before but I just thought it was absolutely
hillarious:
http://www.3ofcoins.net/2009/01/30/common-lisp-clojure-and-seriousness/
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.c
academic (in the context of dynamical matrix preconditioning). :-)
Unfortunately, it does not work out well in practice despite the existence of
some great Hilbert curve libraries:
http://www.tiac.net/~sw/2008/10/Hilbert/moore/index.html
The reason is that cache locality much prefers striping over suit
e of any use for simulating a flock of
> birds.
People are using FMM for flocking:
http://www.itk.ilstu.edu/faculty/portegys/research/ptree-PDPTA03.pdf
http://litis.univ-lehavre.fr/~tranouez/publications/Cossom2007-LITIS-DutotTranouez.pdf
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consul
effort:
>
> http://openjdk.java.net/projects/mlvm/
Too late:
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/mlvm-dev/2009-January/000331.html
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message bec
On Tuesday 20 January 2009 08:01:19 ivant wrote:
> IIRC, the only major complain Rich has about JVM is the lack
> of tail-call optimization.
That's a pretty major problem. :-)
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsult
43 matches
Mail list logo
