On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 6:08 PM, Chris Riddoch <riddo...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 3:46 PM, David Nolen <dnolen.li...@gmail.com> wrote: >> A entire collection of 5e7 *objects* is being realized into memory as it is >> being reduced down to a single value to be stored into a var. I would expect >> this to perform poorly in any language. > > Range doesn't return a lazy seq? Or reduce somehow doesn't work > lazily? This is a little discouraging - it seems like this is a > perfect example of a case where laziness could significantly improve > things.
No, both are lazy. Something else is going on here, involving def holding onto the head of any sequence whose expression is in the def form but not in a nested let or fn similar scope-creating form. -- 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
