4 ms·
The article is a year and a half old. Clojure doesn't "try" to do OO- multimethods always worked pretty well, and with 1.2.0 it does OO very well. Clojure desi
by swannodette 16y ago
The article is a year and a half old. Clojure doesn't "try" to do OO- multimethods always worked pretty well, and with 1.2.0 it does OO very well.
Clojure design philosophy is essentially "OOP: The Good Parts".
- peregrine 16y agoAs someone new to clojure I gotta say that multimethods are pretty nice.
- mahmud 16y agoFor there to be "Good Parts" of OOP, there would have to be a single kind of OOP. P.S. Smalltalk.
- jfoutz 16y agoi always miss interfaces in smalltalk. sometimes i really want a guarantee that the receiver will actually listen when i send a particular message. Even if you don't agree with that part, interfaces are really nice because the system will tell you, "hey, you forgot to add a method to respond to X. you got the other four, but spaced out this one. you should do something about that."
- loewenskind 16y agoThat doesn't follow. If we define "OOP" to encompasses everything that anyone calls OOP then it's very possible for there to be "good parts" and "bad parts" in that set. P.S. Smalltalk is a beautiful language with a great deal to offer anyone, but multimethods are superior. The fact that multimethods don't require multiple dispatch patterns demonstrates this.