On Oct 8, 2013 5:35 AM, "Phillip Lord" > > > However… I find that I am writing a lot of statements like this: > > > > (cond (hash-map? v) > > …… > > > > (vector? v) > > …… > > > > (list? v) > > ….. > > > > :else …..) > >
zcaudate, in what context(s) do you find yourself writing a lot of expressions like that? I rarely want to allow so much flexibility in arguments. I'm wondering if there are idioms to avoid it. > > I'm not sure a type checker will help in that instance. > > > A type-checker wouldn't no, but a type system would; pretty much > every language with a static type system has a type based dispatch > somewhere. It would be nice to be able to do > > (defun fn > ([^vector v] ...) > ([^list l] ...) > ([else] ...) How is Clojure's protocols feature different from what you're describing? -- -- 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 unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
