Then probably something like this will help me out
(defn defmutualmethods [multifn dispatch-val & fn-tail]
(defmethod multifn dispatch-val fn-tail)
(defmethod multifn (reverse dispatch-val) fn-tail))
Nevertheless i'm making things more complex now because it does two things
now! But it will make it easier for me i guess.
its just a thought
On Tuesday, November 20, 2012 9:19:23 PM UTC+1, Brian Marick wrote:
>
>
> On Nov 20, 2012, at 10:22 AM, Thomas Goossens wrote:
>
> > I think it is a bit dull that for every combination [type1 type2] you
> have to define an equivalent method for [type2 type1]
> >
> > Is there a way to address this problem? perhaps with sets?
>
>
> According to http://clojure.org/multimethods only vectors work if you
> want to have a type hierarchy. I wish sets worked, but then you'd have to
> also have some sort of destructuring mechanism to bind the parameters.
>
> -----
> Brian Marick, Artisanal Labrador
> Contract programming in Ruby and Clojure
> Occasional consulting on Agile
> Writing /Functional Programming for the Object-Oriented Programmer/:
> https://leanpub.com/fp-oo
>
>
>
--
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
