It's an interesting approach, the extra layers of abstraction feel reminiscent of my days with enterprise java. As far as components go I think I might be able to achieve a similar effect using prismatic/plumbing graphs. The lazy compile option for graphs may be beneficial when there are a very large number of elements in the graph. Also I'm sure components is amazing but I try not to use any library that has fewer than a handful of active maintainers. The prospect of one of my core dependencies in a production app becoming outdated to the point of incompatibility is very worrisome.
I've also considered the fact that If I have a large number of elements that each depend on the same thing like a database connection. I could apply that thing to each in sequence with a monad. Basically the monad's context would hold the database connection and then each element could be raised into that context when it needed the connect. But, that's just my limited Haskell knowledge coming through again. On Wednesday, July 22, 2015 at 11:06:48 AM UTC-5, keegan myers wrote: > > I've begun building a rather complex web application in > Clojure/ClojureScript. After some evaluation I decided that CQRS + event > sourcing would fit the requirements well. As such I have a bunch of > aggregates (models) each in their own namespace that contain all the > applicable record definitions, their invariants, and the commands each > responds to. Predictably there are numerous operations that are similar > between all aggregates. > > In my controllers I will be evaluating JSON requests and creating a list > of commands based on those requests. I would like to dynamically dispatch > the commands to the aggregates and let the aggregates handle them by either > returning more commands or committing an event to the db. What is the best > practice to dynamically send a command to an aggregate's namespace? I'm > aware of solutions that make use of protocols and multimethods. My primary > concern is where should I be requiring the aggregate namespaces? > > Is it best to do as some web frameworks do and just require everything > (all namespaces) in some kind of application wide superset (probably using > tools.namespace). Should I have a superset for each type of namespace (eg > all controllers required together, all aggregates ...) or should I only > require a namespace on an as needed basis. If so how would I achieve > dynamic dispatch between aggregates without requiring their namespace. > > Sorry I'm still pretty new to Clojure. I know I can achieve this in a > number of ways, but I'm looking for the most idiomatic approach that will > cause the least headaches as this application grows. > -- 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/d/optout.
