On Saturday, August 4, 2012 6:07:20 PM UTC-4, Jim foo.bar wrote: > > aaaa ok this is clearer now! I actually like what you're proposing just > not in the form you're proposing it...since the record will already create > 2 constructors in the underlying class, having essentially a 3rd sounds a > bit crowded...minimally, you want (and I agree) the ability to optionally > attach validator functions to some record fields. I have to admit that > sounds nice...we can already do that with atoms why can't we do that with > regular vars? > > Jim > > Validator can be a good feature, but I don't think that can substitute constructors, because constructors can do more than just validating, as we all know from other OO languages.
-- 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
