Hi,
On Feb 9, 12:13 am, aria42 <ari...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is it possible to have default implementations associated with
> functions in a protocol? This is most useful when some protocol
> functions are defined in terms of other. For instance,
>
> (defprotocol Span
> (start [self])
> (stop [self])
> (span-length [self]))
>
> Now I know I can just make span-length a function on Span as opposed
> to part of the protocol. Is that what one should do?
The last time I checked, it was my understanding the mix-ins are used
for this.
(defprotocol Thing (abc []) (xyz []))
(def AThing {:abc (fn [] ...) :xyz (fn [] ....)})
(deftype Banana ...)
(extend Thing Banana (merge AThing {:abc (fn []...)}))
This would effectively use the "default" implementation of xyz and
provide a custom one for xyz.
But I'm not up-to-date with the protocol stuff.
Sincerely
Meikel
--
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
