6 ms·

Announcing Clojure/core

107 points by alrex021 16y ago

zachbeane 16y ago
I wonder if Arc is the tortoise to Clojure's hare.
- silkodyssey 16y ago
  Would you care to elaborate? Your assertion implies that arc is going to surpass clojure in popularity. Why do you think so? Personally I think that's unlikely to happen given the traction that clojure has been getting already. Clojure has been designed for practical use and is already being used in real world projects whereas I get the impression that arc is sort of a research project where Paul is just experimenting with some ideas and is not constrained by the desire to do practical work.
  - zachbeane 16y ago
    I didn't make any assertions. Clojure is wildly successful and follows a pattern of development that seems fruitful to emulate. But in the story, the tortoise does win.
    - fogus 16y ago
      I am always on the lookout for interesting stories about people using functional programming on the job. Are you currently using Arc to this end?
      - zachbeane 16y ago
        I don't use Arc at all.
        zaph0d 16y ago
        ROFLMAO! I think we are taking your comments too seriously.
    - cema 16y ago
      It's not a story. It's a paradox. The tortoise loses, but the paradox pitches logic against intuition and is thus educational, like a koan (from a different cultural tradition). I am not sure if it is applicable to Clojure (as well as Arc and lisp in general) where intuition follows logic rather than contradicts it.
    - forlucy 16y ago
      Worse is better and in this case Clojure is even more so 'The zombie-reanimated corpse of Lisp'. http://jng.imagine27.com/articles/2009-08-19-011225_clojure_the_false_lisp.html http://jng.imagine27.com/articles/2009-08-19-011225_clojure_...
- swannodette 16y ago
  Besides being a Lisp, Arc does not exist anywhere near the the same territory as Clojure. Lisp introduced us to: code == data Clojure introduces us to: code == concurrent high-performance immutable data
  - zachbeane 16y ago
    In a hundred years, is that something that will matter?
    - swannodette 16y ago
      concurrent high-performance immutable data sounds pretty much like the fabric of reality. So I would hazard a YES :) In fact it'll probably matter in a million years from now.
    - jules 16y ago
      In a hundred years, will any of the stuff in Arc matter? What exactly? The innovation in Arc is minimal, Clojure does much more in new and better ways.
    - kleiba 16y ago
      "Multi-core is here to stay", says Rich Hickey
      - forlucy 16y ago
        Hopefully not. Multi-core should be seen as a stepping stone on the way to better technology.
        runevault 16y ago
        Why not have multi-core version of other tech, unless you are talking Quantum Computing, though isn't that in some ways the ultimate form of multi-core?
  - ynniv 16y ago
- francoisdevlin 16y ago
  PG lists 9 points that made Lisp awesome. After using Clojure for a while, I would argue that a good approach to State, Identity & Value is point #10.
- Artemidoros 16y ago
  Arc's problem is that it is not the only tortoise in the race.
- praptak 16y ago
  I wonder if Arc to Clojure isn't more like GNU Hurd to Linux.
- lukev 16y ago
  Is there anything promising about Arc other than being PG's pet language? I'm not knocking PG here - I just don't see Arc having any real differences from all the other lisp variants. There's nothing revolutionary about it. Which is fine - it is a 100-year language, not a revolutionary language. I just wonder what the odds are that anyone remembers it in a decade. People use langauges that are unique, and as far as I can see, Arc is not all that unique (unless you're the sort of person who becomes highly excited about the minutia of Lisp semantics)
mark_l_watson 16y ago
Nice. I have been appreciating Clojure a lot more recently because my largest customer uses it (so I am using it). There is a lot to like: practical language, good decisions on how Java integration is done, nice setup for supporting contrib library, easy to use stable 1.1 or 1.2 depending on project (since with leinigen I put clojure.jar and clojure-contrib.jar in each project's lib directory), nice Emacs support with swank-clojure, etc. I dont hire other programmers but if I did I would appreciate have so much Clojure specific talent in one organization. I hope that Clojure/core prospers - they deserve it.
- zaph0d 16y ago
  Who is your largest customer? It would be interesting to know about companies using Clojure.
  - mark_l_watson 16y ago
    They are in 'stealth mode.' I'll ask them what I can talk about.
    - zaph0d 16y ago
      Sure, thanks. At least make an announcement on HN when they come out of stealth mode.
      - mark_l_watson 16y ago
        Our Techcrunch presentation is over, so here you go: http://www.compasslabs.com/ http://www.compasslabs.com/ Video of presentation: http://www.livestream.com/disrupt/video?clipId=pla_b6c62d26-0557-4110-9178-e80678cdf301 http://www.livestream.com/disrupt/video?clipId=pla_b6c62d26-... (the judges liked it :-)
alrex021 16y ago
Commercial site url: http://clojure.com/ http://clojure.com/
rfreytag 16y ago
Something about a commercial website with its sense of self-interest versus welcoming-user-focus causes me a gut bad reaction. Postgres is an good example of doing this right IMHO: http://www.postgres.com http://www.postgres.com the commercial aspects are underplayed and yet they have a good business. With Postgres I feel I can contribute even if I am not part of the "core." I think Clojure and the businesses around it benefit from keeping the same open, welcoming feeling. I have been very interested in Clojure and haven't seen it put a foot wrong so far. This is an unexpected "off" note. EDIT: Languages and tools do prosper and my point here is to highlight how they do so by building a community and what Clojure's "core" risk through making this distinction. EDIT: I know about http://clojure.org http://clojure.org - my point is that http://postgres.com http://postgres.com (note the .com) downplays the us-vs-them-ness that comes with a commercial tombstone site. Also the announced redirect indicates to me the change in tone is intentional - I hope they readjust. They can keep the community-sense and still have a good business.
- swannodette 16y ago
  http://clojure.org http://clojure.org
- avar 16y ago
  I think the us v.s. them aspect of this is all in your head. We all like working on our hobbies, but unless we're able to get paid for it that's all they'll ever be. Clojure has been trying to solve this problem for a while (see http://clojure.org/funding http://clojure.org/funding). If they're able to make something like this work then I think that's great. It's still an open source project, it's not like they'll be rejecting patches because they come from the wrong people. It just means that more people can do Clojure for a living, which'll improve the language itself and the platform for everyone.
  - rfreytag 16y ago
    You may have missed my point. I take time to offer supported criticism because I want to see Clojure succeed. To succeed, Clojure must keep the community or there is no business in supporting the language. Some language comparisons: Perl got where it is on the strength of its community which now supports many language-focused businesses. Community is also cited as one of the strengths of Python and Ruby which also have associated thriving businesses. Community is regularly cited as a problem with LISP (wait, wait, hold the spears - I'm a LISPer too!). PTL Scheme is the exception that seems to prove the rule - good community there. Languages and tools do prosper and my point here is to highlight how they do so by building a community and what Clojure's "core" risk through making this distinction. I see I may initiate a language dispute and that is not my intention. Other projects just seem the best source of supporting comparisons.

107 points by alrex021 16y ago

zachbeane 16y ago

I wonder if Arc is the tortoise to Clojure's hare.

silkodyssey 16y ago
Would you care to elaborate? Your assertion implies that arc is going to surpass clojure in popularity. Why do you think so? Personally I think that's unlikely to happen given the traction that clojure has been getting already. Clojure has been designed for practical use and is already being used in real world projects whereas I get the impression that arc is sort of a research project where Paul is just experimenting with some ideas and is not constrained by the desire to do practical work.
- zachbeane 16y ago
  I didn't make any assertions. Clojure is wildly successful and follows a pattern of development that seems fruitful to emulate. But in the story, the tortoise does win.
  - fogus 16y ago
    I am always on the lookout for interesting stories about people using functional programming on the job. Are you currently using Arc to this end?
    - zachbeane 16y ago
      I don't use Arc at all.
      - zaph0d 16y ago
        ROFLMAO! I think we are taking your comments too seriously.
  - cema 16y ago
    It's not a story. It's a paradox. The tortoise loses, but the paradox pitches logic against intuition and is thus educational, like a koan (from a different cultural tradition). I am not sure if it is applicable to Clojure (as well as Arc and lisp in general) where intuition follows logic rather than contradicts it.
  - forlucy 16y ago
    Worse is better and in this case Clojure is even more so 'The zombie-reanimated corpse of Lisp'. http://jng.imagine27.com/articles/2009-08-19-011225_clojure_the_false_lisp.html http://jng.imagine27.com/articles/2009-08-19-011225_clojure_...
swannodette 16y ago
Besides being a Lisp, Arc does not exist anywhere near the the same territory as Clojure. Lisp introduced us to: code == data Clojure introduces us to: code == concurrent high-performance immutable data
- zachbeane 16y ago
  In a hundred years, is that something that will matter?
  - swannodette 16y ago
    concurrent high-performance immutable data sounds pretty much like the fabric of reality. So I would hazard a YES :) In fact it'll probably matter in a million years from now.
  - jules 16y ago
    In a hundred years, will any of the stuff in Arc matter? What exactly? The innovation in Arc is minimal, Clojure does much more in new and better ways.
  - kleiba 16y ago
    "Multi-core is here to stay", says Rich Hickey
    - forlucy 16y ago
      Hopefully not. Multi-core should be seen as a stepping stone on the way to better technology.
      - runevault 16y ago
        Why not have multi-core version of other tech, unless you are talking Quantum Computing, though isn't that in some ways the ultimate form of multi-core?
- ynniv 16y ago
francoisdevlin 16y ago
PG lists 9 points that made Lisp awesome. After using Clojure for a while, I would argue that a good approach to State, Identity & Value is point #10.
Artemidoros 16y ago
Arc's problem is that it is not the only tortoise in the race.
praptak 16y ago
I wonder if Arc to Clojure isn't more like GNU Hurd to Linux.
lukev 16y ago
Is there anything promising about Arc other than being PG's pet language? I'm not knocking PG here - I just don't see Arc having any real differences from all the other lisp variants. There's nothing revolutionary about it. Which is fine - it is a 100-year language, not a revolutionary language. I just wonder what the odds are that anyone remembers it in a decade. People use langauges that are unique, and as far as I can see, Arc is not all that unique (unless you're the sort of person who becomes highly excited about the minutia of Lisp semantics)

mark_l_watson 16y ago

Nice. I have been appreciating Clojure a lot more recently because my largest customer uses it (so I am using it). There is a lot to like: practical language, good decisions on how Java integration is done, nice setup for supporting contrib library, easy to use stable 1.1 or 1.2 depending on project (since with leinigen I put clojure.jar and clojure-contrib.jar in each project's lib directory), nice Emacs support with swank-clojure, etc. I dont hire other programmers but if I did I would appreciate have so much Clojure specific talent in one organization. I hope that Clojure/core prospers - they deserve it.

zaph0d 16y ago
Who is your largest customer? It would be interesting to know about companies using Clojure.
- mark_l_watson 16y ago
  They are in 'stealth mode.' I'll ask them what I can talk about.
  - zaph0d 16y ago
    Sure, thanks. At least make an announcement on HN when they come out of stealth mode.
    - mark_l_watson 16y ago
      Our Techcrunch presentation is over, so here you go: http://www.compasslabs.com/ http://www.compasslabs.com/ Video of presentation: http://www.livestream.com/disrupt/video?clipId=pla_b6c62d26-0557-4110-9178-e80678cdf301 http://www.livestream.com/disrupt/video?clipId=pla_b6c62d26-... (the judges liked it :-)

alrex021 16y ago

Commercial site url: http://clojure.com/ http://clojure.com/

rfreytag 16y ago

Something about a commercial website with its sense of self-interest versus welcoming-user-focus causes me a gut bad reaction. Postgres is an good example of doing this right IMHO: http://www.postgres.com http://www.postgres.com the commercial aspects are underplayed and yet they have a good business. With Postgres I feel I can contribute even if I am not part of the "core." I think Clojure and the businesses around it benefit from keeping the same open, welcoming feeling. I have been very interested in Clojure and haven't seen it put a foot wrong so far. This is an unexpected "off" note. EDIT: Languages and tools do prosper and my point here is to highlight how they do so by building a community and what Clojure's "core" risk through making this distinction. EDIT: I know about http://clojure.org http://clojure.org - my point is that http://postgres.com http://postgres.com (note the .com) downplays the us-vs-them-ness that comes with a commercial tombstone site. Also the announced redirect indicates to me the change in tone is intentional - I hope they readjust. They can keep the community-sense and still have a good business.

swannodette 16y ago
http://clojure.org http://clojure.org
avar 16y ago
I think the us v.s. them aspect of this is all in your head. We all like working on our hobbies, but unless we're able to get paid for it that's all they'll ever be. Clojure has been trying to solve this problem for a while (see http://clojure.org/funding http://clojure.org/funding). If they're able to make something like this work then I think that's great. It's still an open source project, it's not like they'll be rejecting patches because they come from the wrong people. It just means that more people can do Clojure for a living, which'll improve the language itself and the platform for everyone.
- rfreytag 16y ago
  You may have missed my point. I take time to offer supported criticism because I want to see Clojure succeed. To succeed, Clojure must keep the community or there is no business in supporting the language. Some language comparisons: Perl got where it is on the strength of its community which now supports many language-focused businesses. Community is also cited as one of the strengths of Python and Ruby which also have associated thriving businesses. Community is regularly cited as a problem with LISP (wait, wait, hold the spears - I'm a LISPer too!). PTL Scheme is the exception that seems to prove the rule - good community there. Languages and tools do prosper and my point here is to highlight how they do so by building a community and what Clojure's "core" risk through making this distinction. I see I may initiate a language dispute and that is not my intention. Other projects just seem the best source of supporting comparisons.