Hello, The following article:
http://kirindave.tumblr.com/post/658770511/monkey-patching-gorilla-engineering-protocols-in claims that, as far as code safety is concerned, clojure's solution is far better than e.g. ruby monkey patching. If I understand things well, one problem with ruby monkey patching is that if a library I use opens a class C and adds a method whose signature is M to it, and if in my own code I also open the same class C and add a method whose signature is M to it, then the library may break because it will call my implementation of M, not the librarie's original one. Now to clojure. I can see the same problem occur, while the article's author claims that in clojure there's (almost) no problem anymore. If several libraries, including my program, redefine blindlessly a protocol implementation for the same type, then the "last to speak" wins. So isn't the problem basically the same ? -- 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
