23 ms·

Huh no. You may have parens but that's it. It's not not predominantly a functional programming language and has no rich set of immutable, persistent data struc

Huh no. You may have parens but that's it. It's not not predominantly a functional programming language and has no rich set of immutable, persistent data structures. So, it's no Clojure. But it is young. It may become a clojure but it seems presumptuous at this stage..

Lazare 10y ago
> it's not a lisp Why do you say that? > no powerful macro system It has macros that...look pretty powerful to me? What's your issue with them? > doesn't share with Lisp the code-as-data philosophy Can you flesh out your objections a bit more? Edit: For the sake of anyone reading this later, the comment I was replying to originally said Zygomys wasn't a lisp, which seemed a bit odd. It has since been edited to say Zygomys isn't Clojure, which is quite correct.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- keymone 10y ago
  i think the largest issue is that their first example is this monstrosity: zygo> x := 3; y := 5; if x + y == 8 { (println "we add up") } else { (println "wat?" ) } still something being lisp is not really sufficient to claim it is clojure. clojure is much more.
  - Lazare 10y ago
    Agreed. The comment I replied to was (at the time) disputing Zygomys's status as a lisp; it's since been changed to questioning Zygomys's claim to be a Clojure-equivalent, which I quite agree with. Perhaps a better analogy would be Groovy, rather than Clojure? (Of course, Groovy isn't "cool" these days, so I guess there's not much marketing juice in comparing your new language to it...)
    - vorg 10y ago
      > Groovy isn't "cool" these days, so I guess there's not much marketing juice in comparing your new language to it I think of Apache Groovy as being to the JVM what bash is to Linux. You could compare it to bash.
      - Lazare 10y ago
        Well, at one time it aimed to be quite a bit more. As I recall there was a lot of envy of dynamic language in general and Ruby in particular when Groovy first got popular. There was even a Groovy on Rails framework, just to make the longing more obvious. From memory, Groovy only reinvented itself as a scripting language some years later.
iagooar 10y ago
Calling itself a Clojure is a pretty bold statement. Clojure is one of the most revolutionary programming languages of the last decade, I can't see how this mini-toy-language packaged as a Go library can be compared to the mighty Clojure with a straight face.
- mapcars 10y ago
  What revolutionary exactly? Transducers?
  - grabcocque 10y ago
    Transducers and Spec are two great examples of what Clojure's community is best at. There's a practicality of purpose and single mindedness of philosophy at play in the language's evolution here. Making simple easy. To my mind though, Clojure brought clarity to the JVM on issues of concurrency, state, mutability, object orientation and persistence and for that I will always love it.
    - fnordsensei 10y ago
      It's also spawned the recent interest in immutability. Via Om it's had a considerable effect on how Facebook has developed React and its ecosystem, for example.
    - pjmlp 10y ago
      Transducers were already in Common Lisp in 1989, https://www.reddit.com/r/Clojure/comments/3tha86/transducers_in_1989/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Clojure/comments/3tha86/transducers... Likewise Spec ideas are not new to old timer Lispers, many forms of Lisp type annotations are similar to it. What Clojure has brought was making those ideas "modern" again.
      - pron 10y ago
        Isn't the idea that all mutation must either be local or transactional rather revolutionary? In a sense, Erlang is like that, too, but Clojure took the idea much further. It is pretty clear that that's Clojure's the main idea.
coldtea 10y ago
>and has no rich set of immutable, persistent data structures. Lisp doesn't either. Functional programming >> immutability.
- omni 10y ago
  But Clojure does, which was his point. zygomys is explicitly comparing itself to Clojure.
  - coldtea 10y ago
    In the sense that "Clojure is the de facto JVM Lisp" --> this aims to be the de facto Go environment Lisp. Not in the sense that it is more like Clojure than another Lisp in syntax and semantics.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
lobster_johnson 10y ago
The way I understood it, the mention of Clojure was by analogy — Zygomys is to Go as Clojure is to Java (based on the same runtime, tight integration, but altogether different languages). I didn't interpret this to mean that Zygomys is anything like Clojure.

Lazare 10y ago

> it's not a lisp Why do you say that? > no powerful macro system It has macros that...look pretty powerful to me? What's your issue with them? > doesn't share with Lisp the code-as-data philosophy Can you flesh out your objections a bit more? Edit: For the sake of anyone reading this later, the comment I was replying to originally said Zygomys wasn't a lisp, which seemed a bit odd. It has since been edited to say Zygomys isn't Clojure, which is quite correct.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
keymone 10y ago
i think the largest issue is that their first example is this monstrosity: zygo> x := 3; y := 5; if x + y == 8 { (println "we add up") } else { (println "wat?" ) } still something being lisp is not really sufficient to claim it is clojure. clojure is much more.
- Lazare 10y ago
  Agreed. The comment I replied to was (at the time) disputing Zygomys's status as a lisp; it's since been changed to questioning Zygomys's claim to be a Clojure-equivalent, which I quite agree with. Perhaps a better analogy would be Groovy, rather than Clojure? (Of course, Groovy isn't "cool" these days, so I guess there's not much marketing juice in comparing your new language to it...)
  - vorg 10y ago
    > Groovy isn't "cool" these days, so I guess there's not much marketing juice in comparing your new language to it I think of Apache Groovy as being to the JVM what bash is to Linux. You could compare it to bash.
    - Lazare 10y ago
      Well, at one time it aimed to be quite a bit more. As I recall there was a lot of envy of dynamic language in general and Ruby in particular when Groovy first got popular. There was even a Groovy on Rails framework, just to make the longing more obvious. From memory, Groovy only reinvented itself as a scripting language some years later.

iagooar 10y ago

Calling itself a Clojure is a pretty bold statement. Clojure is one of the most revolutionary programming languages of the last decade, I can't see how this mini-toy-language packaged as a Go library can be compared to the mighty Clojure with a straight face.

mapcars 10y ago
What revolutionary exactly? Transducers?
- grabcocque 10y ago
  Transducers and Spec are two great examples of what Clojure's community is best at. There's a practicality of purpose and single mindedness of philosophy at play in the language's evolution here. Making simple easy. To my mind though, Clojure brought clarity to the JVM on issues of concurrency, state, mutability, object orientation and persistence and for that I will always love it.
  - fnordsensei 10y ago
    It's also spawned the recent interest in immutability. Via Om it's had a considerable effect on how Facebook has developed React and its ecosystem, for example.
  - pjmlp 10y ago
    Transducers were already in Common Lisp in 1989, https://www.reddit.com/r/Clojure/comments/3tha86/transducers_in_1989/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Clojure/comments/3tha86/transducers... Likewise Spec ideas are not new to old timer Lispers, many forms of Lisp type annotations are similar to it. What Clojure has brought was making those ideas "modern" again.
    - pron 10y ago
      Isn't the idea that all mutation must either be local or transactional rather revolutionary? In a sense, Erlang is like that, too, but Clojure took the idea much further. It is pretty clear that that's Clojure's the main idea.

coldtea 10y ago

>and has no rich set of immutable, persistent data structures. Lisp doesn't either. Functional programming >> immutability.

omni 10y ago
But Clojure does, which was his point. zygomys is explicitly comparing itself to Clojure.
- coldtea 10y ago
  In the sense that "Clojure is the de facto JVM Lisp" --> this aims to be the de facto Go environment Lisp. Not in the sense that it is more like Clojure than another Lisp in syntax and semantics.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

lobster_johnson 10y ago

The way I understood it, the mention of Clojure was by analogy — Zygomys is to Go as Clojure is to Java (based on the same runtime, tight integration, but altogether different languages). I didn't interpret this to mean that Zygomys is anything like Clojure.