On Feb 26, 4:06 pm, Konrad Hinsen <konrad.hin...@laposte.net> wrote:
> On 26.02.2009, at 10:00, Konrad Hinsen wrote:
>
> > I know, but as I said, my current implementation is just a proof of
> > concept. It is not viable for production use for a variety of
> > reasons. I was planning to replace it by something based on gen-class
> > and proxy, but I will first try to get away with the new type
> > function.
>
> I just committed a completely new implementation to clojure.contrib.
> It uses a vector with type metadata for representingalgebraicdata
> types. Overall I am rather happy with this version. It is used almost
> exactly like the previous one.
>
> There is probably still room for improvement, but I don't expect the
> interface to change significantly any more, so I'd say it's safe for
> adoption by adventurous Clojurians :-)
>
I was wondering if you considered using maps or struct-maps for this.
One of my pet peeves with algebraic data types is the unnamed,
positional nature of the components/fields. It always bothers me you
have to rename the fields in every pattern match, skip fields with _
etc.
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
