Hi Nicolas,
I get the idea, but I don't see how this would help provide a default
implementation for the functions inside a protocol. It looks to me
like this would be the same as creating a record with only some of the
functions implemented. Or am I reading it wrong?
Thanks for your input.
Toni.
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 1:21 PM, Nicolas Oury <nicolas.o...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I read my mail and couldn't understand it.
> Here is what I meant:
> (defprotocol MessageReceived
> (message-received ...))
> (defprotocol ExceptionCaught
> .....)
> (extend Object MessageReceved {:message-received
> default-message-received-function}...
> )
> (deftype channel-handler
> ExceptionCaught ....)
> (not the lack of message received implementation)
>
> --
> 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
--
Antoni Batchelli
- twitter: @tbatchelli , @disclojure
--- email: tbatche...@gmail.com
----- web: tbatchelli.org , disclojure.org
--
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
