Hi Lyn, Dynamic vars for resource sharing is not a favored approach due to performance and several other reasons. This blog post explains it well: http://stuartsierra.com/2013/03/29/perils-of-dynamic-scope
Shantanu On Thursday, 29 August 2013 07:21:46 UTC+5:30, Lyn Headley wrote: > > Hello, if I want to run some sql code in a transaction, I can do > this (where clojure.java.jdbc is referred to as j): > > (j/db-transaction > [conn dbspec] > use conn here > > But if I have a function I want to call from this transaction, say to > do a query, then I need to pass in the connection to that function: > > (defn query [conn] > do query on conn...) > > (j/db-transaction > [db dbspec] > (query conn)) > > I am trying to decide whether I like passing in the connection to > query, or whether I would rather use a binding like so: > > (def ^:dynamic *conn*) > > (defn query [] > do query on *conn*...) > > (j/db-transaction > [conn dbspec] > (binding [*conn* conn] > (query))) > > Looking at the jdbc docs, I notice that this style used to be directly > supported but is now deprecated. Does that mean it's a bad idea to > re-implement on top of the supported API, as my example would? Can > someone explain the tradeoffs involved? > > Thanks, > Lyn Headley > > -- -- 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 --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
