What is interesting to me (and as it should be, I guess) is that as the code gets more 'functional', it gets easier to work with, which is nice.
Cheers Tom 2009/1/6 Rich Hickey <richhic...@gmail.com> > > On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 2:07 PM, Stuart Halloway > <stuart.hallo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hi Rich, > > > > Thanks for the suggestion. I have moved all the per-game stuff (apple, > > snake, frame, panel, and timer) into a local let inside a game > > function. Is that what you had in mind? > > > > Yup. > > Rich > > > > > >> On Jan 6, 11:54 am, Stuart Halloway <stuart.hallo...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> Code like @*foo* is not something I've seen in any code Rich has > >>>> written, so I think Stuart is right in considering removing the > >>>> asterisks on *apple* and *snake* > >>> > >>> I plan to remove them. What I still wrestle with is using "snake" at > >>> the top level as ref, and then having a bunch of pure functions that > >>> shadow the top level snake with a binding to an immutable snake data > >>> structure. > >>> > >> > >> Might I suggest then that you do away with the globals snake and apple > >> altogether? > >> > >> The result will be a much cleaner program. > >> > >> Rich > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
