On 16 май, 05:57, ataggart <alex.tagg...@gmail.com> wrote: > Perhaps you misunderstand protocols. Protocols don't support a > hierarchy, thus you don't extend them; you have types implement/reify > them. Any "extending" you do will be against a type.
By extending the protocol I mean "extending the polymorphism of the protocol's methods to call the supplied functions when an AType is provided as the first argument" (http://clojure.org/ protocols) > Further, a protocol is a set of abstract function definitions; it is > not a type, as such the notion of "functions that accept or return > protocols" doesn't apply. For example, with the following: > (defprotocol P > (foo [x]) > (bar-me [x] [x y])) > It would make no sense to say some function "takes an instance of P", > unless you're talking about the two functions, foo and bar-me. While in theory protocol is a set of abstract function definitions, in actual implementation protocol structure includes set of extenders and implementing functions. This state (what types currently implement the protocol and how) is what I really want to be able to manipulate. The way it is tied to the protocol definition and changed by the extend function seems to cause the problem. -- 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
