On Saturday, May 12, 2012 8:12:53 AM UTC-5, Baishampayan Ghose wrote: > > > You got the basic idea right, that of creating a lexical closure over > the config map. But I personally don't like the approach of returning > a function that takes a function and applies it over the other args. > > I suggest that you take a look at Deftype & Protocols. You can have > two types (Neo4J & Rexster) that can hold the config map in each > instance. > > Thanks BG --
I'll go read up more on protocols; however, I read that protocols don't support varargs. One of the reasons I haven't looked at them more closely is that the Python methods use varags, and I'm trying to keep the interface as close as possible. Out of curiosity, what don't you like about "apply"? -- are there performance issues, etc...? - James -- 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
