On 10 Feb, 16:21, Greg <g...@kinostudios.com> wrote: > Patrick, > > I can't speak for the OP, but I found his question interesting and I'd like > to compliment you on your response.
I've been experimenting with Patrick's solution - and it's really quite good. I had a function which collected the things I emitted, and then realised it wouldn't be a convenient representation from the callers point of view. So instead of the callee collecting the emisions, I changed it so that it simply didn't bother. This achieves a very nice separation of concerns. Callee doesn't bother to work out why you want something, it just spits it out there and lets some caller worry about it. So callees don't have to bother about accumulating results, and you don't have to pass along results up the chain - callee just fires and forgets. Very neat. I think Patrick gets to be called King Of Clojure - at least for today. ;) Regards. -- 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
