3 ms·
No, I was talking about (Common) Lisp's generic functions (http://clhs.lisp.se/Body/m_defgen.htm http://clhs.lisp.se/Body/m_defgen.htm). I realize I did not giv
by junke 10y ago
No, I was talking about (Common) Lisp's generic functions (http://clhs.lisp.se/Body/m_defgen.htm http://clhs.lisp.se/Body/m_defgen.htm). I realize I did not give enough context. Define a generic function:
(defgeneric garnish (what with-what))
Specialize it on one or multiple arguments:
(defmethod garnish ((c cocktail) (f fruit)) ...)
(defmethod garnish ((s sandwich) (h ham)) ...)
...
But you can use it like a function:
(let ((currified (rcurry #'garnish :curry)))
(map 'list currified items))
- jeremiep 10y agoAh my bad! :) These look very much like Clojure's protocols and multi-methods.
- junke 10y agoYes, more like multi-methods, except for standard qualifiers (:around, :before, ...) and user-defined ones. OTOH, Clojure allows you to define a custom dispatch function.
- jeremiep 10y agoAh yes, Clojure has no first-class support for aspects. Its easy enough to monkey patch definitions for the rare case when its needed. Most of the time however I try to avoid aspects as they introduce hidden behaviour in existing functions, which can be hard to reason about at scale, especially with more than a few developers.
- junke 10y agoI use them all the time. It's a great way to separate responsibilities.
- jeremiep 10y agoI prefer function composition for that when possible :) Aspects I feel are more useful when you want to modify the behaviour of existing code you don't own. Maybe if I had easy access to them I'd find more use cases :)