3 ms·
Nothing. Zero benefits here for typical usage of ClojureScript. Potentially interesting for 3rd party bootstrap efforts like Planck, Lumo, etc.
by swannodette 10y ago
Nothing. Zero benefits here for typical usage of ClojureScript. Potentially interesting for 3rd party bootstrap efforts like Planck, Lumo, etc.
- espeed 10y agoTrue, but it helps fix the TTFX metric -- "Time to First XML" ;-) -- Derek Slager made a case for this in his talk at the Conj: "ClojureScript for Skeptics" https://youtu.be/gsffg5xxFQI?t=20m9s https://youtu.be/gsffg5xxFQI?t=20m9s The remaining bit of Java is like "a little piece of kelp that's stuck to the hull, and even though it's little, you don't want anything stuck to the hull" (http://www.tv-quotes.com/shows/the-west-wing/quote_14096.html http://www.tv-quotes.com/shows/the-west-wing/quote_14096.htm...). TTFX 1: http://clojurescript.org/guides/quick-start http://clojurescript.org/guides/quick-start
- brucehauman 10y agoTo be fair, the XML is listed at the very bottom as the last of the options for getting your dependencies.
- valw 10y agoZero technical benefits for sure, but it may help with ClojureScript's marketing. I've seen many JS developers outright dismiss ClojureScript / Closure because they don't want anything that involves Java - which is completely irrational, but a reality still.