On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 8:20 PM, Alex Osborne <a...@meshy.org> wrote: > Ken Wesson <kwess...@gmail.com> writes: > >> On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 7:18 PM, Alex Osborne <a...@meshy.org> wrote: > >>> Struct maps were in the language for a long time before defrecord was >>> added. Records are supposed to replace them for most purposes. So if >>> in doubt between the two use a defrecord. >> >> Isn't one advantage of structmaps over records that you don't need to >> AOT your structmaps? And can thus change them on the fly during >> REPL-driven programming, debugging, and experimentation instead of >> having to do a discrete edit, build, test cycle? > > Actually you don't need to AOT compile records or types. They work fine > for interactive development.
Eh. That's not what I saw written elsewhere. Or is it just protocols? Though usually those are used hand-in-hand with records. -- 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 group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
