IIndexed is the protocol that maps to nth.
Well, IIndexed is the protocol behind -nth, and some dispatching also
happens in nth itself. So there is two levels of dispatch: in the nth
function (closed) and in the IIndexed protocol (open). See the Michał
Marczyk's comment about IIndexable and
On 1 July 2012 16:39, David Nolen wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Michał Marczyk
> wrote:
>> Additionally I would like to note that Haskell's ad hoc polymorphism
>> solution, the system of type classes, allows for extensions predicated
>> on a type class already being implemented:
>>
>>
On 1 July 2012 16:25, David Nolen wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Vinzent wrote:
>> Extend on nil, IIndexed and default (I realize that it's currently
>> impossible in cljs).
>
> IIndexed is the protocol that maps to nth. We already extend IIndexed
> to nil. Extending default to IIndexed
On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Michał Marczyk
wrote:
> Additionally I would like to note that Haskell's ad hoc polymorphism
> solution, the system of type classes, allows for extensions predicated
> on a type class already being implemented:
>
> -- no dependencies on other type classes
> instanc
Additionally I would like to note that Haskell's ad hoc polymorphism
solution, the system of type classes, allows for extensions predicated
on a type class already being implemented:
-- no dependencies on other type classes
instance SomeClass SomeType where
...
-- depend on OtherClass being imp
On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Vinzent wrote:
> Extend on nil, IIndexed and default (I realize that it's currently
> impossible in cljs).
IIndexed is the protocol that maps to nth. We already extend IIndexed
to nil. Extending default to IIndexed leads to horrible things like
the following:
(ind
On 1 July 2012 15:04, Vinzent wrote:
> Extend on nil, IIndexed and default (I realize that
> it's currently impossible in cljs).
Actually it is possible and it is how things were originally
implemented. The move to the current implementation happened as part
of an effort to make things faster. Th
Extend on nil, IIndexed and default (I realize that
it's currently impossible in cljs).
воскресенье, 1 июля 2012 г., 18:39:27 UTC+6 пользователь David Nolen
написал:
>
> How do you think the conditionals can be removed?
>
> On Sunday, July 1, 2012, Vinzent wrote:
>
>> Just an idea: predicate dis
How do you think the conditionals can be removed?
On Sunday, July 1, 2012, Vinzent wrote:
> Just an idea: predicate dispatch can be combined with protocols into one
> thing, eliminating the need for defrecord-like things at all. Low level
> types defined with deftype, higher-level abstractions de
Just an idea: predicate dispatch can be combined with protocols into one
thing, eliminating the need for defrecord-like things at all. Low level
types defined with deftype, higher-level abstractions defined with that
"dynamic protocols" thing. It'd be fun to play with it :)
Don't you think the
On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 11:15 PM, Mark Engelberg
wrote:
>
> In any case, I feel like I understand better how you've structured things in
> ClojureScript and what can and can't be done easily with protocols. Thanks!
I think predicate dispatch + protocols could eliminate the existing
closed cases.
implementation which only supports one abstract protocol!) I don't feel
strongly about last specifically, but if people wanted it to behave
polymorphically, I'd be happy to volunteer to write the code.
Thanks a lot for the detailed analysis and volunteering to write the code.
Not surprisingly
OK, I get it now.
Protocols are attached to very specific capabilities.
With this structure, it is easy to:
Write a function that operates on an input that fulfills a specific
protocol.
Write a function that operates on an input that fulfills (all of) multiple
protocols.
Write a function that op
Never mind, found it.
--
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 grou
On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 9:36 PM, David Nolen wrote:
> Look at the implementation of nth. Or how polymorphic unification works in
> ClojureScript core.logic for ISequential. I misspoke a bit, should have
> clearer that I simply meant that ILast (probably something else entirely)
> needs to be care
Look at the implementation of nth. Or how polymorphic unification works in
ClojureScript core.logic for ISequential. I misspoke a bit, should have
clearer that I simply meant that ILast (probably something else entirely)
needs to be carefully considered since the logic needs too be moved to the
act
This is a continuation of issues raised in the thread about making the core
"last" function behave in a polymorphic manner.
The separation of interfaces from implementation in Java serves several
purposes, but one thing it does is it allows the creation of abstract data
types, i.e., a type that is
17 matches
Mail list logo
