On Mar 9, 2:43 am, mikel <mev...@mac.com> wrote:
> On Mar 9, 1:19 am, Mark Engelberg <mark.engelb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 10:44 PM, mikel <mev...@mac.com> wrote:
> > > Clojure doesn't have to provide these facilities (though I wouldn't
> > > mind if it did); it just needs to stay out of my way when I decide I
> > > need to add them.
>
> > Yeah, as much as I like maps, I feel like there are several common
> > uses cases for maps that require more work in Clojure than other
> > languages. The most obvious example is tagged structs. In Clojure,
> > you need to do a defstruct, and then make your own custom constructor
> > that adds the tag, possibly another custom constructor that emulates
> > struct-map but adds the tag, and possibly a predicate that tests for
> > the tag.
>
> That reminds me; struct-maps don't work with *print-dup*-style
> serialization/deserialization; is that intentional for some reason, or
> should I report it as an issue?
>
No, it's a known thing. In order to support efficient use as constants
struct bases need to be implemented in an AOT-friendly way akin to how
fns and proxies are now.
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
