suggest new (method-map ...) function

[jon]

Would it be a good idea to add a function like this to the standard
library, to allow an "official" way to lookup individual methods (as
opposed to only knowing the multi-method as a whole), and therefore
facilitate more precisely targeted aspect/context-style wrapping --
ie. for logging, tracing, monkey-patching(?), etc?

(defn method-map [multifn]
(. multifn methodTable))

-------------------------------------------------------------------
user=> (method-map area)
{:Rect clojure.fns.user.fn__1080$fn__1082$fn__1084@c5d9c1, :Circle
clojure.fns.user.fn__1089$fn__1091$fn__1093@15b4ad2, :default
clojure.fns.user.fn__1098$fn__1100$fn__1102@8d3d62}

user=> (def area-circle ((method-map area) :Circle))
#<Var: user/area-circle>

user=> (area-circle c)
452.3893421169302
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks,
Jon

[Rich Hickey]

On Apr 5, 4:35 pm, jon <superuser...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Would it be a good idea to add a function like this to the standard
> library, to allow an "official" way to lookup individual methods (as
> opposed to only knowing the multi-method as a whole), and therefore
> facilitate more precisely targeted aspect/context-style wrapping --
> ie. for logging, tracing, monkey-patching(?), etc?
>

At some point there will be a proper function-based interface to the
multimethods, and something like (find-method multi dispatchval).

Along with that will be a relationship between a method and a var, and
any kind of runtime/context based wrapping will use the standard var
binding stuff.

But not now, and until then you should consider the implementation of
multimethods opaque and subject to change.

Rich

[jon]

Ok, sounds good.

Do you think a 'Planned features' page on the clojure site would be a
worthwhile addition?
eg.
Categorized into:
- High priority (planned to be added in the forseeable future)
- Low priority (nice-to-have's with no current timeframe)
and possibly
- Non-goals (these features are not objectives of clojure and unlikely
to be added)

I think several of all of these have been mentioned.
Cheers, Jon

[Rich Hickey]

On Apr 5, 5:47 pm, jon <superuser...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Ok, sounds good.
>
> Do you think a 'Planned features' page on the clojure site would be a
> worthwhile addition?

I think it would only add unwelcome pressure to my life :)

Rich