Hello Stuart, sorry to answer so late, got holidays, happily. I tried to use the function extenders to list the implementations, so to say, of the protocol. That was playing around, not a use case taken from reality. If I try to make a use case up, hm, I may need it in the development environment, to find functions to ponder their use.
Regards, alux On 3 Sep., 16:05, Stuart Halloway <stuart.hallo...@gmail.com> wrote: > Let's back up: what are you trying to do with 'extenders'? > > Stu > > > Yes, thats what I see. > > I just dont think this is very sensible. > > > Thank you Meikel! > > > Greetings, alux > > > On 3 Sep., 13:10, Meikel Brandmeyer <m...@kotka.de> wrote: > >> Hi, > > >> On 3 Sep., 12:49, alux <alu...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > >>> shouldnt the type x be listed a extender of xx here? Or why not? > > >> No. It shows up if you actually use extend to the extend the protocol > >> to the type. > > >> 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 -- 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
