6 ms·

We can do more than that. If everybody followed the trend, then Lisp would be dead, and we'd all just write Java. shivers

behnamoh 10y ago
I used to think likewise (you can check my previous comments). But at the end of the day, you gotta pay the bills... Nonetheless, I have huge respect for CL. I think I'm gonna learn it well once and for all. (maybe use it for back-end).
- qwertyuiop924 10y ago
  True 'nuff. I prefer Scheme to CL. The tooling isn't as developed, but Chicken and Guile are both plenty usable, and Scheme is less crufty than CL.
  - sotojuan 10y ago
    Chicken + some plugins they provide are almost more than enough for most people! Great project.
    - qwertyuiop924 10y ago
      Indeed. It's actually my preferred language for writing code. It may not have as many libraries, and it might not be as mature as, say, CL, but it's just so pleasant to program in.
JBiserkov 10y ago
Thankfully Rich Hickey & co wrote Clojure so we can program on a modern Lisp in the Java Virtual Machine and in the browser! (ClojureScript) (even the .NET CLR is supported) [1] http://clojure.org http://clojure.org [2] http://clojurescript.org http://clojurescript.org
- qwertyuiop924 10y ago
  Not a super fan of Clojure, but it's a good language. Shame it's still stuck in the Java ecosystem, though.
  - smnplk 10y ago
    I believe the whole point was to target the JVM, because of reuse and maturity. And actually it's not stuck just in java ecosystem, clojure got wings years ago. Yoy can find it inside a browser today too :)
    - metaobject 10y ago
      I wonder if there ever has been talk of a native Clojure? I guess it may not be very usable without the JVM ecosystem, though. Frankly, I find calling JVM library calls from Clojure to be quite ugly and really stand out in the code (mostly because of the mix of the lower-case-dash-delimited variable and fn nameing convention of Clojure and the mixed-case/camelCase naming style of Java.
      - pjmlp 10y ago
        Yes, there are a few aborted attempts. The problem with all languages that decide to implement their own runtime, instead of building it on top of JVM or .NET eco-systems is that their native code generation and GC implementation are always going to be worse. Also there is the issue of having to implement the whole set of third party libraries from scratch, just like PyPy and JRuby have issues using libraries that rely on CPython or Ruby FFI. So unless you get a set of developers really committed to go through the efforts of making it succeed, everyone will ignore it.
      - JBiserkov 10y ago
        The closest thing to a native Clojure is Pixie[1]. As the authors note, it's a "Clojure inspired lisp", not a "Clojure Dialect". >Pixie implements its own virtual machine. It does not run on the JVM, CLR or Python VM. It implements its own bytecode, has its own GC and JIT. And it's small. Currently the interpreter, JIT, GC, and stdlib clock in at about 10.3MB once compiled down to an executable. [1] https://github.com/pixie-lang/pixie https://github.com/pixie-lang/pixie

behnamoh 10y ago

I used to think likewise (you can check my previous comments). But at the end of the day, you gotta pay the bills... Nonetheless, I have huge respect for CL. I think I'm gonna learn it well once and for all. (maybe use it for back-end).

qwertyuiop924 10y ago
True 'nuff. I prefer Scheme to CL. The tooling isn't as developed, but Chicken and Guile are both plenty usable, and Scheme is less crufty than CL.
- sotojuan 10y ago
  Chicken + some plugins they provide are almost more than enough for most people! Great project.
  - qwertyuiop924 10y ago
    Indeed. It's actually my preferred language for writing code. It may not have as many libraries, and it might not be as mature as, say, CL, but it's just so pleasant to program in.

JBiserkov 10y ago

Thankfully Rich Hickey & co wrote Clojure so we can program on a modern Lisp in the Java Virtual Machine and in the browser! (ClojureScript) (even the .NET CLR is supported) [1] http://clojure.org http://clojure.org [2] http://clojurescript.org http://clojurescript.org

qwertyuiop924 10y ago
Not a super fan of Clojure, but it's a good language. Shame it's still stuck in the Java ecosystem, though.
- smnplk 10y ago
  I believe the whole point was to target the JVM, because of reuse and maturity. And actually it's not stuck just in java ecosystem, clojure got wings years ago. Yoy can find it inside a browser today too :)
  - metaobject 10y ago
    I wonder if there ever has been talk of a native Clojure? I guess it may not be very usable without the JVM ecosystem, though. Frankly, I find calling JVM library calls from Clojure to be quite ugly and really stand out in the code (mostly because of the mix of the lower-case-dash-delimited variable and fn nameing convention of Clojure and the mixed-case/camelCase naming style of Java.
    - pjmlp 10y ago
      Yes, there are a few aborted attempts. The problem with all languages that decide to implement their own runtime, instead of building it on top of JVM or .NET eco-systems is that their native code generation and GC implementation are always going to be worse. Also there is the issue of having to implement the whole set of third party libraries from scratch, just like PyPy and JRuby have issues using libraries that rely on CPython or Ruby FFI. So unless you get a set of developers really committed to go through the efforts of making it succeed, everyone will ignore it.
    - JBiserkov 10y ago
      The closest thing to a native Clojure is Pixie[1]. As the authors note, it's a "Clojure inspired lisp", not a "Clojure Dialect". >Pixie implements its own virtual machine. It does not run on the JVM, CLR or Python VM. It implements its own bytecode, has its own GC and JIT. And it's small. Currently the interpreter, JIT, GC, and stdlib clock in at about 10.3MB once compiled down to an executable. [1] https://github.com/pixie-lang/pixie https://github.com/pixie-lang/pixie