Have a look at this: http://cemerick.com/2011/07/05/flowchart-for-choosing-the-right-clojure-type-definition-form/
Now, as far as i understood, you define a protocol and the extend it on types defined via defrecord. That's more like Character is a protocol that defines functions for movement, attacks and other things and then you extend this protocol to Player, Monster etc. records and provide protocol-implementations for each of these types. It's less like packing all things into one class, more like behavioural composition. Your could also extend an AI protocol on your Monster-record. Then you have a Monster, moving like a Character, controlled by an AI. On 28 Jul., 10:12, Oskar <oskar.kv...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi! > > I have not heard much about records and protocols. What is a typical > use case in idiomatic Clojure code for them? Is it a good idea, for > example, to make a "Character" protocol and "Player" and "Monster" > records or something in a game. It feels a bit too much like OOP for > me to be comfortable with it, but I can't immediately see why that > would be bad. I just don't know how they are supposed to be used. -- 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
