By the way... I know using (case) is ugly. On the bright side, my system doesn't care how you write the actual function, just so long as you follow the interface. So you could use wart's :case for it as well:
(def my-table ()
...)
(def my-table (m) :case (is m 'keys)
...)
(def my-table (m k) :case (is m 'get)
...)
(def my-table (m k v) :case (is m 'set)
...)
...at least, I think that's how :case works? I actually like the wart style. That's supposed to be equivalent to this:
(= my-table (fn (m k v)
(case m
'keys ...
'get ...
'set ...)))
So yeah, it doesn't matter how you define your function (case or :case or `if` or extend or whatever), just so long as it follows the interface.
P.S. My goal here isn't necessarily to increase raw power, it's to increase extensibility and conciseness. Being able to do the same thing, but in a very hacky and verbose way doesn't sound appealing to me. So if wart has equivalent power, that's great! But I want to do better. I want to have equivalent power and make it shorter and make it more extensible.
Yeah that was the half of your point I understood when I was peddling wart :) But yes wart won't handle user code that checks the type of an object if that is important to you.
