>
> I am not sure I follow...If you're just creating a new record yourself,
> you can pass whatever you want to the constructor...no need for
> 'setting' whatsoever...On the other hand if you're consuming an object
> then you might need to 'set' some fields before it is useful (where doto
> comes into play).
>
>
>
I have a feeling we may not be talking about the same thing here. What I
want is constructors, not a "setter". My understanding is, in Clojure there
is no constructors for record other than simply passing in the field values
(directly or in a map). And hence I am proposing to have some constructors
similar to other OO languages. Having constructors have nothing to do with
immutability.
Here is a maybe silly example, but hope it communicates what I want. I want
something like this:
(defrecord Book
[age-min age-max]
(make-record "Make a book for an age group" [age-min age-max]
(when (> age-min age-max)
(throw (IllegalArgumentException. "Minimum age is greater than
maximum age.")))
(Book. age-min age-max)))
(make-record Book 6 5) => IllegalArgumentException
(make-record Book 3 5) => Book#{:age-min 3 :age-max 5}
BTW, this not to argue with you. But I sometimes I feel some people have
some kind of extreme opposition against anything associated with OO. I just
think people designing and using OO languages are no all that stupid.
--
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
