Thank you for the link, but I don't think what you outlined there is the same as what I have. I'm referring to records by class and protocols defined in the namespace, so I think my situation is different.
On Monday, October 28, 2013 12:08:52 PM UTC-4, red...@gmail.com wrote: > > I don't know about the rest of this thread, but loom seems to suffer > from what I've outlined in > > http://dev.clojure.org/jira/browse/CLJ-322?focusedCommentId=32246&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-32246 > > pulling in the interface that the protocol generates instead of the > protocol. > > On 10/26/13, 5:42 PM, Aysylu Greenberg wrote: > > I was wondering if anybody has found a solution to this problem. I'm > > experiencing the same issue in this project < > https://github.com/aysylu/loom>. > > If you disable aot (this line< > https://github.com/aysylu/loom/blob/master/project.clj#L9>), > > the tests start failing with a similar error message. > > > > Thanks, > > Aysylu > > > > On Thursday, April 18, 2013 8:27:53 AM UTC-4, Ragnar Dahlén wrote: > >> > >> Thank you for your explanation. I also suspect there is some subtle > >> issue with the class file being used by the different constructors. > >> > >> However, I would be surprised if this behaviour is intended, and that > >> the 'hackery' you proposed is the only, and prefered way of solving > this. > >> > >> To better illustrate the core issue, I updated the example slightly > >> as follows: > >> > >> Premise: > >> defrecordissue.arecord and defrecordissue.protocol constitute some > >> library. > >> > >> 1. defrecordissue.arecord defines a record type, and a function that > >> will return an instance of the record: > >> > >> (ns defrecordissue.arecord) > >> > >> (defrecord ARecord []) > >> > >> (defn make-record > >> [] > >> (->ARecord)) > >> > >> 2. defrecordissue.protocol defines a protocol, and extends it to the > >> record type defined in 1. It also defines a public function > >> intended to be used by libraries: > >> > >> (ns defrecordissue.aprotocol > >> (:require [defrecordissue.arecord]) > >> (:import [defrecordissue.arecord ARecord])) > >> > >> (defprotocol AProtocol > >> (afn [this])) > >> > >> (extend-protocol AProtocol > >> ARecord > >> (afn [this] 42)) > >> > >> (defn some-public-fn > >> [] > >> (afn (defrecordissue.arecord/make-record))) > >> > >> 3. defrecordissue.consumer is a consumer of the library, knows > >> nothing of any protocols or records, but only wants to call a > >> function thats part of the public api: > >> > >> (ns defrecordissue.consumer > >> (:require [defrecordissue.aprotocol])) > >> > >> (defrecordissue.aprotocol/some-public-fn) > >> > >> This fails with the same root cause. > >> > >> I've created a new branch for this in the GitHub repo. > >> > >> https://github.com/ragnard/defrecordissue/tree/more-realistic > >> > >> /Ragge > >> > >> On Thursday, 18 April 2013 12:19:35 UTC+1, Andrew Sernyak wrote: > >>> > >>> I guess extend-type does changes only to generated java class and the > var defrecordissue.arecord->ARecord > >>> contains the 'old' version of ARecord constructor. Obviously it would > be > >>> weird for defprotocol to change the variable in another namespace. > >>> Especially when you can extend a record from anywhere. > >>> > >>> So If you want to create a record that implements your protocol via > var > >>> from record namespace, you should do some hackery to update that > variable. > >>> I've done a pull-request for you, but using direct constructor will be > more > >>> idiomatic > >>> > >>> ; > >>>> ; this won't work unless you update manualy a variable ->ARecord in > the > >>>> namespace > >>>> ; > >>>> ;(defrecordissue.aprotocol/afn (defrecordissue.arecord/->ARecord)) > >>>> ; > >>>> ; like > >>>> (defmacro from-ns[nmsps & body] > >>>> "launches body from namespace" > >>>> `(binding > >>>> [*ns* (find-ns ~nmsps)] > >>>> (eval > >>>> (quote (do ~@body))))) > >>>> (from-ns 'defrecordissue.arecord > >>>> (import '(defrecordissue.arecord.ARecord)) > >>>> (alter-var-root > >>>> ('->ARecord (ns-publics 'defrecordissue.arecord)) > >>>> (fn[x] (fn[] (new ARecord))))) > >>>> (println (defrecordissue.aprotocol/afn > >>>> (defrecordissue.arecord/->ARecord))) > >>>> ; 42 > >>> > >>> > >>> ndrw > >>> > >> > > > > > -- > And what is good, Phaedrus, > And what is not good— > Need we ask anyone to tell us these things? > > -- -- 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.
