Why not tease things apart?
(defn eval [x] ...)
(some eval my-list) ;; or list
(every? eval my-list) ;; and list
https://clojuredocs.org/clojure.core/some
https://clojuredocs.org/clojure.core/every_q
Now, you can make the eval function polymorphic in several ways, simplest is to
case or cond o
Hi Erik,
I think that teasing things apart helps along some dimensions, but the
problem I face, still thinking like a Java hacker, is that I need to put
things together:
I need to construct a *type* (deftype) which honors two different
interfaces, a list, and an evaluable object. I need the type
Hey Jack,
Just been a fly on the wall for this convo, and aside from offering a
specific solution, which others have done, I'm pretty certain this can be
done with just protocols and records. Make a record (like your type) that
implements the two protocols (like your interfaces). You could achieve
Brandon!
That just might be the idea I needed. Thank you.
Film at 11...
On Sat, Aug 15, 2020 at 2:28 PM Brandon R wrote:
> Hey Jack,
>
> Just been a fly on the wall for this convo, and aside from offering a
> specific solution, which others have done, I'm pretty certain this can be
> done with
My first attempt at using records (showing my ignorance here) is found in
this gist
https://gist.github.com/KnowledgeGarden/0f6ce01ed9300d4f9bd0ee0c61e3d91b
It fails with this error (which doesn't give very good google)
Syntax error macroexpanding clojure.core/defn at (cljtest/core.clj:123:1).
>
