On Jul 29, 2011, at 1:50 AM, Laurent PETIT wrote: > Without too much thinking about it, I would have thought monsters, players, > etc. need to be changed in a same "transaction", so would have by default > implemented them as refs instead of atoms. > > Could you elaborate more on the choice of atoms as design decisions ?
Not to hijack the question, but in my game I used a single atom containing the state of the entire game world as a hash. This is not too inefficient thanks to Clojure's structure-sharing, and has certain advantages: saving or printing the world state becomes trivial, and you can simplify argument lists for functions that need to use multiple world objects (though some would object to passing the entire world to a function that uses only certain parts of 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 group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
