Helping newcomers to the language on #clojure, I often find the need to use
a protocol in reference to it's namespace rather than the namespace of the
datatype extending it is a counter-intuitive one for people learning the
language. Similar with dispatch methods.
Speculatively, I think it has
My experience with protocols is that the implementations can't be
redefined, e.g changing an implementation. So if you change one of the
applied protocols, you may need to restart your REPL. YMMV.
Using records outside of their declared namespace is also really weird.
You need to both
You don't need to import the record if you use the auto-gen'd factories,
-RecordName and map-RecordName. You can and also shouldn't import the
java interfaces created by protocols.
It's possible to interactively develop this way, but you really have to
know what's being eval'd and what types are
You are right about the factory methods for Records. My need to reference the
records in another namespace was for type hinting.
On Nov 5, 2014, at 6:12 PM, Gary Trakhman gary.trakh...@gmail.com wrote:
You don't need to import the record if you use the auto-gen'd factories,
-RecordName
Heres one thing:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/clojure/ILPz4QOEod8
Requiring the namespace where you declared the type is not enough, you need
to import the type separately if you want to avoid using the
fully-qualified name.
There is also a difference in this behavior between clojure
Maybe the most confusing thing is which construct to use when.
I've found the following posts to be pretty helpful in sorting out the
different tradeoffs:
https://github.com/Prismatic/eng-practices/blob/master/clojure/20130926-data-representation.md
Thanks for the responses! This is very helpful.
--
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
Hi Daniel,
When running through tutorials and blog posts it did not occur to me that
the functions of a defprotocol are namespaced to where they are defined.
Meaning, calling these functions I have to use their original namespace.
It is obvious when one reads the official documentation, but one
As recently mentioned on another thread, this also means that you cannot
have two different protocols with the same method names in the same
namespace. This may be surprising, especially from an OO background, where
it is very natural to have two types with the same operations.
On Monday, 27
These responses are all super helpful, thank you! I'd love to hear more
pitfalls/pain points if anyone else wants to share.
Thanks!
Daniel
On Monday, October 27, 2014 6:59:43 AM UTC-4, Gary Verhaegen wrote:
As recently mentioned on another thread, this also means that you cannot
have two
The differences between OOP and multimethods should be stressed.
I just wrote about this on my blog, and those who mostly worked with OOP
kept wondering, how do you get inheritance of functionality? Actually, they
did not ask this clearly, so it took me awhile to understand their
question,
It has not been a pain point for me so far, but there is one more thing
that may be somewhat surprising: multimethods and protocols introduce
non-locality into the code.
This means that, with code that uses multimethods or protocols, sometimes
requiring a namespace and not using any symbol from
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 2:21 PM, larry google groups
lawrencecloj...@gmail.com wrote:
The differences between OOP and multimethods should be stressed.
I just wrote about this on my blog, and those who mostly worked with OOP
kept wondering, how do you get inheritance of functionality?
Notice that he intentionally left inheritance out from that definition.
there are more connotations of object oriented than there are quills
on a porcupine.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Clojure group.
To post to this group, send email to
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 4:13 PM, Raoul Duke rao...@gmail.com wrote:
Notice that he intentionally left inheritance out from that definition.
there are more connotations of object oriented than there are quills
on a porcupine.
Sure. But since Alan Kay is the guy who invented the term object
First of all, let me state that I'm a complete Clojure noob.
Still, I thought that Clojure's multimethods were a completely
valid OOP approach.
Q
uoting Alan Kay:
When I have made that point (about Alan Kay's vision) to certain OOP
evangelists, I have been told that Alan Kay's vision
Not sure if this is exactly what you're looking for, but there might be
some relevant info here:
https://github.com/Prismatic/eng-practices/blob/master/clojure/20130926-data-representation.md
Comments/suggestions/questions welcome.
-Jason
On Sunday, October 26, 2014 8:48:29 AM UTC-7, Daniel
17 matches
Mail list logo
