3 ms·

"the people that know Clojure well and participate in its community are not complete douchewieners," Like this guy? (http://www.bestinclass.dk/index.php/2009/1

"the people that know Clojure well and participate in its community are not complete douchewieners," Like this guy? (http://www.bestinclass.dk/index.php/2009/10/python-vs-clojure-evolving/ http://www.bestinclass.dk/index.php/2009/10/python-vs-clojur...) . Seems like a vocal member of the Clojure community and is about the perfect example of a Clojure "douchewiener" (nice word!) that I can think of. Some of the more vocal (and ignorant) members of the clohure community are ex ruby fanbois who jumped off the ruby/RoR bandwagon and moved their babbling proselytizing to Clojure. Yestrday it was all "ooooh mixins, shiny" or " ooooh Open classes shiny" and today it is all " oohh s expressions, shiny!". This is a shame, because Clojure is a nice language that deserves better. But otoh, the quiet and competent Rubyists are breathing easier now. Of course, Rich Hickey and co don't do any unnecessary trumpeting or deprecation of other languages, but there is a lunatic fringe which combines loudness with ignorance in Clojure just as with Haskell (as you point out, correctly). But neither the Haskell loudmouths nor the Clojure loudmouths are as toxic as the Common Lisp loudmouths, so things are relatively better in these languages and that is a good thing.

weavejester 17y ago
I have noticed one or two Clojure articles that border on "douchewienery", but only on personal blogs. I haven't noticed any bad behavior on the Clojure group. That said, I haven't noticed that much negativity in the Ruby community either, aside from on Zed Shaw's blog, so perhaps I'm just looking in the wrong places. (Or the right places, depending on one's point of view.)
- plinkplonk 17y ago
  "I haven't noticed that much negativity in the Ruby community either" Well I interpreted "douchewienery" to be more (ignorance + snobbishness) than being harshly negative. Both Ruby and Clojure have plenty of practitioners who have no deep understanding of other languages (or knowledge of programming language theory or language design skills) combined with a certainty that their language is "the one". Witness all the "Ruby is better than Python" rants. Interestingly, the founders of both languages are the opposite - competent and down to earth. One would think they would be emulated more.
  - eru 17y ago
    > Interestingly, the founders of both languages are the opposite - competent and down to earth. One would think they would be emulated more. Indeed. Though I wish Guido would have more love for tail call optimization. (At least he knows how to write a parser. (I am looking at you, PHP.))

weavejester 17y ago

I have noticed one or two Clojure articles that border on "douchewienery", but only on personal blogs. I haven't noticed any bad behavior on the Clojure group. That said, I haven't noticed that much negativity in the Ruby community either, aside from on Zed Shaw's blog, so perhaps I'm just looking in the wrong places. (Or the right places, depending on one's point of view.)

plinkplonk 17y ago
"I haven't noticed that much negativity in the Ruby community either" Well I interpreted "douchewienery" to be more (ignorance + snobbishness) than being harshly negative. Both Ruby and Clojure have plenty of practitioners who have no deep understanding of other languages (or knowledge of programming language theory or language design skills) combined with a certainty that their language is "the one". Witness all the "Ruby is better than Python" rants. Interestingly, the founders of both languages are the opposite - competent and down to earth. One would think they would be emulated more.
- eru 17y ago
  > Interestingly, the founders of both languages are the opposite - competent and down to earth. One would think they would be emulated more. Indeed. Though I wish Guido would have more love for tail call optimization. (At least he knows how to write a parser. (I am looking at you, PHP.))