> My answer to this is: everything is an implementation at some level. So do > you think we need factory functions of factory functions, and factory > functions of factory functions of factory functions? I am sure that will be > more flexible than just one level of factory functions.
We already have them. They are just functions. (And I think thinking in term of "factory" functions does not make sense. Every pure function takes something and makes something out of it) The construction of data from data is best taken care by functions. That way you don't expose more than you want and you are fully flexible. If you want to have constructors for your records, define a function: (defrecord R ....) (defn make-R ([] ...) ([x y] ...)) What advantages have your proposal over that? -- 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
