OK that makes more sense, BeamFn is not an interface. I imagine they argued
about that decision at some point.
In your example, MyFn looks to be a general class as it can work with any
clojure var. Do you have a package with many of these type of stub classes
defined? I mean, you could name it Bea
I'm glad someone else is thinking on this too!
#2 - For my case at the moment (Apache Beam), I believe we will always know
the types in advance so using a Java class is workable but of course a
(proxy++) would be ideal. Beam asks for us to extend abstract generic class
so we must use (proxy). I
5. If you need a concrete class definition that then implements a set of
type specific interfaces this would seem to fall into a category of
gen-class assuming you could specify the interfaces with type
specifications. I can't immediately place a way to do this with anything
mentioned above. It
eglue,
1. I think this is a great idea if it is really necessary. I would be in
favor of a reify++ alone to simplify things. I find reify amazing at code
compression and heavily use it via type specific macros to implement
interfaces that for instance support a particular primitive type.
2. Is
Oh, I didn't know about that, pretty funky stuff.
--
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.
T
> Do the framework you're talking about do static analysis of the types?
Because generic types are erased at runtime, so there wouldn't ever be a
way for proxy to set them in.
They aren't entirely erased. They're erased from the code, but Java
compilers are obligated to emit generic type signat
> They did cite a significant performance boost as a side effect.
I think it isn't very clear from the wording. They didn't just rewrite it in
Java, they also changed the architecture:
> Storm 2.0.0 introduces a new core featuring a leaner threading model, a
> blazing fast messaging subsystem a
-monitoring/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I agree that this could be a lot easier.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sean Corfield -- (904) 302-SEAN
>>> An Architect's View -- http://corfield.org/
>>>
>>> "If you'r
>> -- Margaret Atwood
>>
>>
>> --
>> *From:* clojure@googlegroups.com on behalf of
>> Nathan Fisher
>> *Sent:* Friday, June 21, 2019 4:17:43 PM
>> *To:* clojure@googlegroups.com
>> *Subject:* Re: Java Interop on steroid
t;
> "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive."
> -- Margaret Atwood
>
>
> --
> *From:* clojure@googlegroups.com on behalf of
> Nathan Fisher
> *Sent:* Friday, June 21, 2019 4:17:43 PM
> *To:* clojure@googl
Here is my problem, distilled. This code should tell the full story:
static class Apple {}
Apple a = new Apple() {};
Type[] x = ((ParameterizedType)a.getClass().getGenericSuperclass())
.getActualTypeArguments();
// x is a Type array containing String, Integer
HOWEVER, via Clojure `proxy`, I do
Here is my problem, distilled. This code should tell the full story:
static class Apple {}
Apple a = new Apple() {};
Type[] x = ((ParameterizedType)a.getClass().getGenericSuperclass())
.getActualTypeArguments();
// x is a Type array containing String, String
HOWEVER, via Clojure `proxy`, I don
By "generic type information", you mean the X in List ?
On Friday, June 21, 2019 at 12:03:46 AM UTC-4, atdixon wrote:
>
> However -- there are many popular Java frameworks that love to reflect on
> their annotations and their generic type signatures.
>
> To name a heavyweight: Spring. But also,
n
Fisher
Sent: Friday, June 21, 2019 4:17:43 PM
To: clojure@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Java Interop on steroids?
Storm recently moved away from Clojure in its core.
https://storm.apache.org/2019/05/30/storm200-released.html
I wonder how much of the legacy Clojure core could be optimised or if
"
-- Margaret Atwood
From: clojure@googlegroups.com on behalf of Chris
Nuernberger
Sent: Friday, June 21, 2019 12:40:28 PM
To: Clojure
Subject: Re: Java Interop on steroids?
Sean,
That is an interesting blog post. Sorry if I am not following everything but
w
;
>>
>>
>> Sean Corfield -- (904) 302-SEAN
>> An Architect's View -- http://corfield.org/
>>
>> "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive."
>> -- Margaret Atwood
>>
>>
>> --
live."
> -- Margaret Atwood
>
>
> --
> *From:* clo...@googlegroups.com > on behalf of eglue >
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 20, 2019 9:03:45 PM
> *To:* Clojure
> *Subject:* Java Interop on steroids?
>
> Don't get me wrong
-- (904) 302-SEAN
An Architect's View -- http://corfield.org/
"If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive."
-- Margaret Atwood
From: clojure@googlegroups.com on behalf of eglue
Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2019 9:03:45 PM
To: Cloj
Don't get me wrong, I'm as much against types as the next R̶i̶c̶h̶
̶H̶i̶c̶k̶e̶y̶ guy.
However -- there are many popular Java frameworks that love to reflect on
their annotations and their generic type signatures.
To name a heavyweight: Spring. But also, of late: big data frameworks, many
writ
19 matches
Mail list logo