Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

That Clojure's target is to replace slow old Ruby (actually that never happens, rather a successful language gains dominance in some niche and spreads from there) is only more evidence that it isn't worth breaking the abstraction called "numbers" to get merely an order of magnitude better performance. Seriously, I almost can't believe this is still an open issue in 2010. And Rich Hickey, who has designed such a great language otherwise, is on the wrong side of it? I'm boggled.

EDIT: If peregrine's comment is right, then we're arguing about something that isn't happening. I hope so.



Clojure's target is to replace slow old Ruby

That is very clearly the opposite of what I wrote.


Oh, sorry! I transposed the words.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: