I understand it. And the approach seems promising and powerful. But the
example seems to me not too successful. And I drew your attention to this
fact in the hope of seeing a more convincing example. Thank you.
вторник, 18 июня 2019 г., 0:33:23 UTC+3 пользователь Alex Miller написал:
>
> Yes,
Yes, the whole point of this approach is to define the interface in Java and
the implementation in Clojure.
> On Jun 17, 2019, at 5:07 PM, ru wrote:
>
> core.clj defines only names "getTimestamp" and "getName", but meaning of
> these names defined in Support.java. For example, that
core.clj defines only names "getTimestamp" and "getName", but meaning of
these names defined in Support.java. For example, that "getTimestamp" means
result of a new java.util.Date.
понедельник, 17 июня 2019 г., 23:35:30 UTC+3 пользователь Alex Miller
написал:
>
> No, there is a bit of Java
No, there is a bit of Java code just to load the Clojure
code, but then it’s Clojure after that (the entity record impl).
--
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
Excuse me, please, may be this is a naive question. As I understand, we
want to call Clojure from Java when we want to use advantages of
implementation of some functionality in Clojure. But, in this example I see
implementation of the functionallity in Java. Am I right?
понедельник, 10 июня
