> If you have to fall through so many cases to get to the Object case why would > you not just use `goog.object/get`?
So the concern isn't a performance regression against current uses of `get`, but about `get` being inefficient relative to plain `goog.object/get` for objects - is that correct? > This type of convoluted convenience over just doing the right thing is never > going to land in ClojureScript. Upside to this convenience would be that everything depending on `get` (like `get-in`) would inherit support for the common case of property access not being a bottleneck. Folks needing the performance could choose to avoid the abstract `get` and so avoid the costly type checks. To me that looks like it might be a reasonable trade?: slow convenience at no cost to other uses, and no impediments to the fast path. In any case, appreciate that our views may differ on this. Thanks again for taking the time to help me understand your perspective. Cheers! And congrats again on the recent major Cljs release, tremendously appreciative of all your efforts! :-) -- Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ClojureScript" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript.
