On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 10:18 AM, Mark Volkmann <r.mark.volkm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I wish there was a convention for identifying constants in Clojure, > even if it's not enforced. I'd be fine with making their names all > uppercase as in Java, but I'm open to other suggestions.
Vars are correctly used only two ways, aren't they? Either meant for thread-local rebinding (*in*, *out*, *print-depth*, etc.) or not (filter, doseq, point-size, win-length). The latter are about as constant as anything gets in Clojure. If you try to change them with 'set!' get an exception "Can't change/establish root binding". Other plain words generally also refer to constants (function formal args, locals). So it seems to me the convention is that constants have plain names while things meant to be rebound and possibly 'set!' have *asterisks*. > My current habit is to use structmaps for anything that is similar to > a Java Bean where all the entries are used like attributes of a Java > object. The only benefit of structmaps (currently) is some space savings when you have lots of maps with the same keys but different values. This comes at the cost of some flexibility (can't dissoc basis keys). --Chouser --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
