6 ms·

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

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
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- pjmlp 10y ago
  Yeah, but for many of us the Java ecosystem is a feature. You only get tooling comparable to Visual VM or Mission Control in commercial Common Lisps. Also I think many that bash Java don't realise it is the only language ecosystem that matches C and C++ in availability across OSes, including many embedded ones.
  - qwertyuiop924 10y ago
    I realize, I just can't stand the ecosystem. Everything is super verbose, frustratingly overcomplicated, and full of XML. Yuck.
    - pjmlp 10y ago
      It is a consequence of being an enterprise language. I imagine you never had the pleasure of doing enterprise distributed computing projects via CORBA, DCOM, SUN-RPC, DCE in C, C++, Visual Basic and Smalltalk. Guess where those enterprise architects moved on. EDIT: Should have mentioned Delphi and Objective-C as well.
      - qwertyuiop924 10y ago
        I didn't, it sounds unpleasant, I can guess, and I don't like it, which is why I'm not a fan of Java.
shakna 10y ago
Though it kind of sucks that Tail Call Elimination is such a difficult task on the JVM. Scheme kind of gets you thinking in a way that works iteratively, but gets expressed recursively. Its easy to read, and can make for some great optimisation without being premature. The JVM does not really support this style of programming - despite LISP's syntax leading towards it.
- qwertyuiop924 10y ago
  Yeah, it's super nice.
- smnplk 10y ago
  recur in clojure is also easy to read in my opinion.
  - shakna 10y ago
    True. However, a named let in Scheme is not a loop. Its still a lambda. Which means you can have nested lets with TCE, and you can construct them on the fly, depending on what your needs are, usung patterns like currying. That flexibility just doesn't work on the JVM. You can force it, but it'll be slow and horrible compared to another pattern - and I don't think a LISP should tell me how to do something. That's Python's ideology.
    - pjmlp 10y ago
      It pops up every now and then in Java Language Summit presentations, usually in comparison with .NET, which does support it. So who knows, maybe some day the JVM finally gets it.
      - rjsw 10y ago
        Well the .NET CLR was designed by a lisper.
- ScottBurson 10y ago
  Ironically, the Lisp Machines didn't have TCO either.
pjmlp 10y ago
Even though I prefer static typing to dynamic typing, Clojure is a pleasure to do some coding for fun while traveling. It would be nicer if the performance was better though, many that only know Java via Clojure don't realize the performance impact of Clojure. At least 1.8 did had some improvements in that direction.

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
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
pjmlp 10y ago
Yeah, but for many of us the Java ecosystem is a feature. You only get tooling comparable to Visual VM or Mission Control in commercial Common Lisps. Also I think many that bash Java don't realise it is the only language ecosystem that matches C and C++ in availability across OSes, including many embedded ones.
- qwertyuiop924 10y ago
  I realize, I just can't stand the ecosystem. Everything is super verbose, frustratingly overcomplicated, and full of XML. Yuck.
  - pjmlp 10y ago
    It is a consequence of being an enterprise language. I imagine you never had the pleasure of doing enterprise distributed computing projects via CORBA, DCOM, SUN-RPC, DCE in C, C++, Visual Basic and Smalltalk. Guess where those enterprise architects moved on. EDIT: Should have mentioned Delphi and Objective-C as well.
    - qwertyuiop924 10y ago
      I didn't, it sounds unpleasant, I can guess, and I don't like it, which is why I'm not a fan of Java.

shakna 10y ago

Though it kind of sucks that Tail Call Elimination is such a difficult task on the JVM. Scheme kind of gets you thinking in a way that works iteratively, but gets expressed recursively. Its easy to read, and can make for some great optimisation without being premature. The JVM does not really support this style of programming - despite LISP's syntax leading towards it.

qwertyuiop924 10y ago
Yeah, it's super nice.
smnplk 10y ago
recur in clojure is also easy to read in my opinion.
- shakna 10y ago
  True. However, a named let in Scheme is not a loop. Its still a lambda. Which means you can have nested lets with TCE, and you can construct them on the fly, depending on what your needs are, usung patterns like currying. That flexibility just doesn't work on the JVM. You can force it, but it'll be slow and horrible compared to another pattern - and I don't think a LISP should tell me how to do something. That's Python's ideology.
  - pjmlp 10y ago
    It pops up every now and then in Java Language Summit presentations, usually in comparison with .NET, which does support it. So who knows, maybe some day the JVM finally gets it.
    - rjsw 10y ago
      Well the .NET CLR was designed by a lisper.
ScottBurson 10y ago
Ironically, the Lisp Machines didn't have TCO either.

pjmlp 10y ago

Even though I prefer static typing to dynamic typing, Clojure is a pleasure to do some coding for fun while traveling. It would be nicer if the performance was better though, many that only know Java via Clojure don't realize the performance impact of Clojure. At least 1.8 did had some improvements in that direction.