On Jan 3, 12:57 pm, Andrew Boekhoff <boekho...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > As for the OO vs functional . . . a web server is a function from a > > > request to a response. How is that functional view any less natural > > > than an OO view? > > > I think someone steeped in the controller/action viewpoint (a la > > Rails) would disagree: they see requests as being parameterized > > actions taken on/by controllers, with those requests being described > > by URI templates and routed by a route specification. > > The controller/action viewpoint could as well be described as a > hashmap of routes to functions, all of which accept an optional map of > parameters, and all of which return an http response. > For me at least, this makes for a clearer mental picture than 'personifying' > the pattern with objects. > > > Me, I'm happy with the functional approach :) > > In complete agreement here :) > > Cheers, > Andy
http://briancarper.net/blog/clojure-and-compojure-to-the-rescue-again Good discussion of routing, HTML generation/templating nad database access (read-heavy) in compojure with compare/contrast to Rails. The clojure language features (multimethods, macros, metadata etc.) compare favorably to the magical method insertion that rails does (class_eval, instance_eval), I think. -- 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 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
