3 ms·

My "slow sense" is tingling too. I'm deadly curious to know how fast I could make that "12-hour" job using Scala or Java. I've done extensive work with Scala,

My "slow sense" is tingling too. I'm deadly curious to know how fast I could make that "12-hour" job using Scala or Java. I've done extensive work with Scala, Java, and bytecodes; writing performant Scala code requires some knowledge of the JVM and how Scala is compiled, and requires sacrificing some of its power; but because the static typing and method dispatching is so similar to Java's, you can get there. From everything I've read about Clojure, it sounds a whole level less efficient. Not trying to knock Clojure, but 12 hours just sounds way way too long without more explanation.

lucifer 17y ago
"From everything I've read about Clojure, it sounds a whole level less efficient." Curious as to what you have read regarding clojure performance. I recall hearing Cliff Click giving it a thumbs up at a JVM language summit: http://www.infoq.com/presentations/click-fast-bytecodes-funny-languages http://www.infoq.com/presentations/click-fast-bytecodes-funn... This may also be apropos: http://groups.google.com/group/clojure/msg/cccf532ca04fcdf4?dmode=source http://groups.google.com/group/clojure/msg/cccf532ca04fcdf4?...
- dkersten 17y ago
  And I've read claims that with type annotations you can get bytecode on-par or close to that of pure Java.
tensor 17y ago
How can anyone even approach this with a straight face? You don't even know what they are computing! If you want to question clojure's performance for technical reasons, do that. But let's not use feelings, and instincts in discussions about concrete scientific topics. There have certainly been several interesting articles on clojure performance, and work done to improve performance for native data structures (transients). I, and no doubt many others, would be genuinely interested in performance studies on more complex concurrency problems I've seen so far.
- lucifer 17y ago
  Then this discussion between Cliff Click and Rich Hickey may be of interest: http://blogs.azulsystems.com/cliff/2008/05/clojure-stms-vs.html http://blogs.azulsystems.com/cliff/2008/05/clojure-stms-vs.h... Its a bit dated ('08), but sounds like the jury is still out on STMs.
  - jbert 17y ago
    That's a great read, thanks very much. It might be worth submitting the link itself to get a wider audience.

lucifer 17y ago

"From everything I've read about Clojure, it sounds a whole level less efficient." Curious as to what you have read regarding clojure performance. I recall hearing Cliff Click giving it a thumbs up at a JVM language summit: http://www.infoq.com/presentations/click-fast-bytecodes-funny-languages http://www.infoq.com/presentations/click-fast-bytecodes-funn... This may also be apropos: http://groups.google.com/group/clojure/msg/cccf532ca04fcdf4?dmode=source http://groups.google.com/group/clojure/msg/cccf532ca04fcdf4?...

dkersten 17y ago
And I've read claims that with type annotations you can get bytecode on-par or close to that of pure Java.

tensor 17y ago

How can anyone even approach this with a straight face? You don't even know what they are computing! If you want to question clojure's performance for technical reasons, do that. But let's not use feelings, and instincts in discussions about concrete scientific topics. There have certainly been several interesting articles on clojure performance, and work done to improve performance for native data structures (transients). I, and no doubt many others, would be genuinely interested in performance studies on more complex concurrency problems I've seen so far.

lucifer 17y ago
Then this discussion between Cliff Click and Rich Hickey may be of interest: http://blogs.azulsystems.com/cliff/2008/05/clojure-stms-vs.html http://blogs.azulsystems.com/cliff/2008/05/clojure-stms-vs.h... Its a bit dated ('08), but sounds like the jury is still out on STMs.
- jbert 17y ago
  That's a great read, thanks very much. It might be worth submitting the link itself to get a wider audience.