7 ms·

Using Clojure as the first language is interesting. Being one of the most expressive and efficient (I am not talking about clock cycles here) languages I've use

Using Clojure as the first language is interesting. Being one of the most expressive and efficient (I am not talking about clock cycles here) languages I've used, I think it will set a great mindset for programming. Clojure is declarative, you tell what you want, not how you want it. It uses immutable data structures and functional programming. It teaches you a sane, safe and beautiful way of working on the problems rather than working against/around/because of your language (e.g building OOP design patterns rather than just solving the problem at hand). Some people might disagree, but Clojure is a very hands-on and practical language. There's not much syntax or quirks to learn; just a big standard library of very useful functions for processing and transforming data.

aaimnr 9y ago
>Being one of the most expressive and efficient (I am not talking about clock cycles here) languages I've used "Productive" seems to be the right word here.
chickenfries 9y ago
> There's not much syntax or quirks to learn Except if you don't know Java.
- jakebasile 9y ago
  I rarely need to directly interact with Java as a Clojure developer. It of course helps to know the host platform but I don’t think it’s a requirement for getting started with the language. If it is a dealbreaker you can always stick to ClojureScript, but then you need to know the ins and outs of JavaScript.
  - hellofunk 9y ago
    Understanding JavaScript is really only necessary if you want to use JavaScript libraries. It still amazes me that the same code can be used on the JVM and in a JavaScript environment most of the time without really needing to understand the details of either platform.
- hellofunk 9y ago
  This is a common misconception. I've never written a line of Java in my life, but have been a professional Clojure dev for several years. I never need to interact directly with Java, because most of the libraries you want to use do that for you anyway, and the language itself is self-supporting and comprehensive to not require interop for nearly everything.
  - tosh 9y ago
    I'd like to second this. Clojure (& ClojureScript) have come a long way and have a vast pool of libraries and wrappers by now. It won't hurt to know something about the underlying environment you work with but you don't have to.
  - chickenfries 9y ago
    I don't know why you assume that I haven't tried Clojure and found the requisite Java knowledge to be a barrier. How did you get into developing Clojure professionally? Personally, learning on my own through resources like Clojure for the Brave and True, I found it difficult.
    - agumonkey 9y ago
      I'd love to hear things you disliked or found confusing. Just for the sake of seeing through others eyes.
      - chickenfries 9y ago
        It's been a while since I tried to get into Clojure/Cljs but when I did I remember errors like the one in this article being cryptic: https://8thlight.com/blog/connor-mendenhall/2014/09/12/clojure-stacktraces.html https://8thlight.com/blog/connor-mendenhall/2014/09/12/cloju... > Caused by: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Don't know how to create ISeq from: clojure.lang.Keyword What's an ISeq? I can guess that' it's part of clojure's implementation from java.lang.IllegalArgumentException, but that's what I'm talking about when saying that clojure isn't a great first language because of how you have to both understand a little bit about clojure and a little bit about java, when it comes to errors and namespaces.
robto 9y ago
Clojure was my first language and I agree. Everything made sense, and I was in for an unpleasant awakening when I started to learn other languages. Mutability in particular makes writing sensible code a lot more difficult. And learning how to properly structure object-oriented programs is still a thing I struggle with, many years later. Clojure's developer ergonomics have spoiled me: I love the repl! And since its stacktraces were the first type of error reporting I was exposed to, I don't think they are as bad as other people make them out to be. Certainly worth the tradeoff considering all the other benefits you get.
- agumonkey 9y ago
  Every time I have to touch OO I sink. Even if I understand method ordering and multiple inheritance a bit. Nothing in OO helps me. Every time I read function first (let's include lisp, scheme or lambda calc way of doing) I get clarity of mind, and spectacular zen attitude to approach problems. I don't "love" clojure, but I so wish more people started with it.
  - blain_the_train 9y ago
    I'm experiencing the same thing right now. Even in Dynamic languages that claim to support FP like Python and Ruby i feel like i'm i have to concede building a compossible system because the language itself is so coupled that the trade off of code is too high. The biggest pain point is both languages couple objects to polymorphism. Now if i want runtime dispatch, i have to create an instance of an object and push data inside of it.
  - romaniv 9y ago
    It's worth learning about the roots of OO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8X-yvDWClc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8X-yvDWClc The ideas were great, but it all went horribly wrong with C++ and never fully recovered. Modern OOP has few benefits of the original vision, while introducing a lot of pitfalls that need to be constantly avoided.
    - agumonkey 9y ago
fnordsensei 9y ago
It's one of the most compact mind/machine interfaces I've encountered.

aaimnr 9y ago

>Being one of the most expressive and efficient (I am not talking about clock cycles here) languages I've used "Productive" seems to be the right word here.

chickenfries 9y ago

> There's not much syntax or quirks to learn Except if you don't know Java.

jakebasile 9y ago
I rarely need to directly interact with Java as a Clojure developer. It of course helps to know the host platform but I don’t think it’s a requirement for getting started with the language. If it is a dealbreaker you can always stick to ClojureScript, but then you need to know the ins and outs of JavaScript.
- hellofunk 9y ago
  Understanding JavaScript is really only necessary if you want to use JavaScript libraries. It still amazes me that the same code can be used on the JVM and in a JavaScript environment most of the time without really needing to understand the details of either platform.
hellofunk 9y ago
This is a common misconception. I've never written a line of Java in my life, but have been a professional Clojure dev for several years. I never need to interact directly with Java, because most of the libraries you want to use do that for you anyway, and the language itself is self-supporting and comprehensive to not require interop for nearly everything.
- tosh 9y ago
  I'd like to second this. Clojure (& ClojureScript) have come a long way and have a vast pool of libraries and wrappers by now. It won't hurt to know something about the underlying environment you work with but you don't have to.
- chickenfries 9y ago
  I don't know why you assume that I haven't tried Clojure and found the requisite Java knowledge to be a barrier. How did you get into developing Clojure professionally? Personally, learning on my own through resources like Clojure for the Brave and True, I found it difficult.
  - agumonkey 9y ago
    I'd love to hear things you disliked or found confusing. Just for the sake of seeing through others eyes.
    - chickenfries 9y ago
      It's been a while since I tried to get into Clojure/Cljs but when I did I remember errors like the one in this article being cryptic: https://8thlight.com/blog/connor-mendenhall/2014/09/12/clojure-stacktraces.html https://8thlight.com/blog/connor-mendenhall/2014/09/12/cloju... > Caused by: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Don't know how to create ISeq from: clojure.lang.Keyword What's an ISeq? I can guess that' it's part of clojure's implementation from java.lang.IllegalArgumentException, but that's what I'm talking about when saying that clojure isn't a great first language because of how you have to both understand a little bit about clojure and a little bit about java, when it comes to errors and namespaces.

robto 9y ago

Clojure was my first language and I agree. Everything made sense, and I was in for an unpleasant awakening when I started to learn other languages. Mutability in particular makes writing sensible code a lot more difficult. And learning how to properly structure object-oriented programs is still a thing I struggle with, many years later. Clojure's developer ergonomics have spoiled me: I love the repl! And since its stacktraces were the first type of error reporting I was exposed to, I don't think they are as bad as other people make them out to be. Certainly worth the tradeoff considering all the other benefits you get.

agumonkey 9y ago
Every time I have to touch OO I sink. Even if I understand method ordering and multiple inheritance a bit. Nothing in OO helps me. Every time I read function first (let's include lisp, scheme or lambda calc way of doing) I get clarity of mind, and spectacular zen attitude to approach problems. I don't "love" clojure, but I so wish more people started with it.
- blain_the_train 9y ago
  I'm experiencing the same thing right now. Even in Dynamic languages that claim to support FP like Python and Ruby i feel like i'm i have to concede building a compossible system because the language itself is so coupled that the trade off of code is too high. The biggest pain point is both languages couple objects to polymorphism. Now if i want runtime dispatch, i have to create an instance of an object and push data inside of it.
- romaniv 9y ago
  It's worth learning about the roots of OO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8X-yvDWClc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8X-yvDWClc The ideas were great, but it all went horribly wrong with C++ and never fully recovered. Modern OOP has few benefits of the original vision, while introducing a lot of pitfalls that need to be constantly avoided.
  - agumonkey 9y ago

fnordsensei 9y ago

It's one of the most compact mind/machine interfaces I've encountered.