8 ms·
While other posters comment that "Clojure still works", IIRC the "promise" was that Clojure/Lisp would be much, much more productive, and that claim I feel like
by swah 8y ago
While other posters comment that "Clojure still works", IIRC the "promise" was that Clojure/Lisp would be much, much more productive, and that claim I feel like must been disproved in daily work, otherwise Clojure would still a main topic around here.
Reminds me of the classic Erann Gatt post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2308370 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2308370
(I loved to play with Elisp, Clojure, Lua, Factor, Ion, Ioke and hope dynamic languages become fashionable again someday...)
- lukev 8y agoIt is (sadly) not clear at all that programming language popularity (or rather, "online buzz" around a language which is all you can measure) correlates strongly with productivity.
- KingMob 8y agoI can only speak for myself, but I'm definitely much, much more productive using Clojure. I think its absence from HN is more reflective of a less-than-stellar onboarding experience for newcomers, and HN's general neophilia.
- empthought 8y agoI think individual developers are most likely to become much, much more productive when using Clojure/Lisp vs. Java, C#, and the like, but software development teams are unlikely to experience the same benefits. And it's not even because Clojure is bad for teams, it's because teams often form because there are nontechnical stakeholders, and suddenly an individual contributor's code-writing productivity is a much smaller factor when compared to the communication practices and other parts of the development process outside of writing code.
- StreamBright 8y agoIf there is one think about humanity that is worth to note is that the shittier alternative always wins. This is true from money through computer architectures to programming languages.
- jimbokun 8y ago"hope dynamic languages become fashionable again someday..." Python, Javascript and Ruby are very dynamic.