On Jun 18, 2010, at 16:24 , Nicolas Oury wrote: > I am not sure (= (* 20 not-a-bottleneck) not-a-bottleneck) > > or more precisely: > (= (* 20 not-a-bottleneck-1 ... not-a-bottleneck-250) not-a-bottleneck)
Point is, no one will write 250 variables even less so values by hand, it will be a map, reduce or whatever and then it's pretty easy to type hint it if the performance is an issue at this point and if you write this code you likely will know that this is a bottleneck. (I ignore the * there since you corrected it, otherwise it'd be a nice Palce to point out that it is likely becoming a overflow and an exception w/o automatic promotion :P) Regards, Heinz -- 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
