On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 2:45 AM, Jay McCarthy <jay.mccar...@gmail.com> wrote: > I parse your comments like this: > > - We can't do these sequence functions fast. > - When we didn't provide them, people complained that they were missing. > - When we provide them slowly, people will complain that Racket is slow. > - It is worse to be slow than featureless.
I think this is incorrect. I read: - When we provide APIs we lock ourselves into them - The proposed sequence API is slow and can't be sped up without significant effort (cf worldwide shortage of Matthew-Flatt-hours) - We shouldn't lock ourselves into a slow API without considering alternatives (cf performance of stream/lazy list abstraction) N. _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev
