Has anyone used protocols to create explicit boundaries between the bigger
pieces of their systems? We want to track/control the interactions between
these sub-systems and are considering using protocols to define public
APIs. Is this good practice? Would it be better to simply create our API
l
On Sep 15, 2016 3:20 PM, "Cameron Barre" wrote:
>
> Has anyone used protocols to create explicit boundaries between the
bigger pieces of their systems?
Absolutely. Depending on what you mean by "boundaries between bigger
pieces". Clojure itself, for one. Also core.matrix, if I'm not mistaken.
On 15 September 2016 at 20:50, Cameron Barre wrote:
> Has anyone used protocols to create explicit boundaries between the bigger
> pieces of their systems? We want to track/control the interactions between
> these sub-systems and are considering using protocols to define public
> APIs. Is this go
I've used protocols this way. In fact, this pattern meshes quite well with
Stuart Sierra's Component lib/pattern. By building system components around
protocols, subsystems/components can be made swappable. This is rather
integral to the current design of Datsys actually.
Of course, as other's
Take a look at Stuart Sierra’s talk “Clojure in the Large” from Clojure/West:
https://www.infoq.com/presentations/Clojure-Large-scale-patterns-techniques
He talks about several techniques for managing boundaries, including protocols.
Sean Corfield -- (970) FOR-SEAN -- (904) 302-SEAN
An
