On 8 déc, 23:13, "Michael Reid" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Then I of course write the implementations for various different
> types. Then, because the multi-method names don't look nice, I wrote a
> macro which transformed the regular operators into calls on the
> multi-methods, i.e.:
>
> (macr
I've been toying with something similar. The approach I took was to
define multi-methods for the various operators:
(defmulti add class)
(defmulti sub class)
(defmulti mul class)
(defmulti div class)
...
Then I of course write the implementations for various different
types. Then, because the m
On 8 déc, 17:14, Mark Fredrickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> >> Alternatively, could I provide a "multi-
> >> math" lib to redefine the core math functions?
>
> > Type classes would be king.
>
> Do you mean this in the Haskell sense?
Yes : http://www.haskell.org/tutorial/classes.html
Haskell ma
>
>> Alternatively, could I provide a "multi-
>> math" lib to redefine the core math functions?
>
> Type classes would be king.
Do you mean this in the Haskell sense? (I'm not too familiar with
those) Or something more like Java's types? I was thinking about how
to solve this problem more gen
On 6 déc, 05:09, Mark Fredrickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Alternatively, could I provide a "multi-
> math" lib to redefine the core math functions?
Type classes would be king.
But at least you can use your definition :
(ns test.test
(:refer-clojure :exclude [+ -]))
(defn +
[a b]
33
Hello,
Clojure newbie here. I'm porting a small Scheme matrix/linear algebra
library over to Clojure as a way to get familiar. In my scheme lib, I
have a (matrix-mult A B) function, but it would be nice to have the
more standard notation (* A B) or (* 3 A) for scalar multiplication.
I see *, /,