Eh, I was afraid the interface would be a problem. So there isn't a
good way to reuse interface implementations for interacting w/ legacy
Java quite yet.
I do like your approach to the macro better. As usual you deliver,
Meikel :)
Sean
On Oct 28, 3:11 am, "Meikel Brandmeyer (kotarak)"
wrote:
Hi,
since IFn is a Java interface and not a protocol, I'm afraid there is no
better way to define this. However I would write the macro slightly
differently. I find this more approachable. YMMV.
(def max-arities 20)
(defmacro definvokable
[type fields & deftype-tail]
(let [f(fields
I'm experimenting with creating my own fn types. I was wondering if
there was a better way of extending IFn than this:
https://gist.github.com/1321330
Is there a more idiomatic way?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
