On Jun 19, 2010, at 4:12 , Rich Hickey wrote: > I have to say I'm in the 'pay for what you use' camp - you need a box, you > ask for one. If I don't (and neither do any of those loops), why should I > have to do extra work to avoid it?
- 42 I totally and wholeheartedly disagree, as long as there is a chance something goes wrong, and here is a lot of it, the default can not be we force people to know more - for example that they explicitly need to box things. And it is not even about longs and BigInts, doubles and Floats or what the java version means also come into play, how often do you mixed calculations because initializing 1 is shorter and more used for you then 1.0? This will now break your loop, make it crumble into dust and give you odd, unexpected and wrong results. Lets get away from the argument already cast and bring a new one. It is an impossible situation that the literal 1 in one place has a different meaning and behavior then in another place. This is in fact a show stopper, I'm serious, this would be worst then java. (* 1 0.2) -> works fine but (loop [n 1 r 1](if (zero? n) r (recur (dec n) (* r 0.2)))) does not because the 1 there is not the 1 in the upper example, that is so utterly wrong and horrible please think about it and think about how you'd sell someone he has to know where a literal means what, I can guarantee you this will keep many people from this wonderful language :(. The default case for a language has to be the most intuitive version otherwise you end up with a mess of complex rules and special cases. It was said before, this is premature optimization in it's worst since it is forced on the user if they want or not. The priority has to be 'it works' later if it matters we can worry about 'it is fast' but this isn't working any more. 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
