It’s not a secret that they came from the same zeitgeist but took wildly different approaches, but inspired each other.

I still don’t understand why they’re referred to as persistent vectors rather than immutable vectors, but I digress.

lemming 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

I still don’t understand why they’re referred to as persistent vectors rather than immutable vectors, but I digress.

I believe that immutable just means, well, immutable, but persistent means that updates are achieved via structural sharing, so they’re efficient.

structural sharing = log n updates

if you think immutable updates are O(n) in 2026, you're so far behind the curve it's laughable

it's crazy how many ppl i interview just stop thinking and insist you can't do better than O(n)

	▲	panick21_ 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		Can you please share these data-structures you are talking about? What papers?

mrkeen 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Because standard libraries in mainstream languages are name-squatting on 'immutable' pretty hard.

You wanted 2+1 to yield 3, but instead you get a runtime exception telling you that 2 can't be changed.