> Alternatively, records could have an enforced mapping {:type
> TheRecordsClass} that does not actually take up storage space, but
> appears when records are queried and automatically imposes the desired
> equality semantics if records were simply treated as maps -- other
> than that a plain map with the same type key-value pair could now
> compare equal to the record. (Would that be a bad thing though?)That might be the clearest way to allow records to behave as Java Maps, while preserving type-based equality. It's how I did things manually to keep struct-maps straight, before there were records. The more I think about the current behavior, the less I think I like it. If P and Q have different implementations of the same protocol, you can have (.equals (P.) (Q.)) but completely different semantics for (foo (P.)) and (foo (Q.)). In any case, I've posted a ticket for the docstring fix: http://dev.clojure.org/jira/browse/CLJ-736 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
