Hello,
So I've been working on a project at work, that required me to code a
simple web interface. I considered going with Noir, and while reading the
code, I noticed a pattern that seems to repeat throughout most of the code
that Chris Granger has published in Clojure. This is what I'm referring to:
; these are at the top level in (ns noir.core)
(defonce noir-routes (atom {}))
(defonce route-funcs (atom {}))
(defonce pre-routes (atom (sorted-map)))
(defonce post-routes (atom []))
(defonce compojure-routes (atom []))
Now, I am new to Clojure, but I am not new to (functional) programming and
I'd like to think that I know a singleton when I see one. Is that really
what these are? If I'm right then defining your 'globals' (for lack of a
better word) like this would mean, among other things, that you really
can't have two independent Noir apps defined/running in the same project -
is that a correct assessment?
Can someone more experienced shed some light on why it's done this way? My
experience in functional programming has taught me to always limit my scope
- I would think that either using thread-local bindings (and then rebinding
them to child threads) or relying on lexical scope would be preferable to
polluting the global state. Is this a Clojure best practice?
Thanks. I'm looking to use Clojure a lot at work, and I'm trying to really
understand the language before I throw it our production problems.
~Adam
--
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
