3 ms·

I work with clojure, and love it, but believe the problem is caused by java or equivalent paradigms applied to clojure. The high probability that clojure was s

I work with clojure, and love it, but believe the problem is caused by java or equivalent paradigms applied to clojure. The high probability that clojure was someone's first functional language could also contribute to the problem. Your thoughts?

thom 8y ago
This is just blaming people for using Clojure's features though. If deep JVM integration wasn't a selling point, you'd use a vastly more mature Lisp, right?
- ken 8y ago
  A lot of us use Clojure despite the JVM, not because of it. Closure has a lot of (other) compelling features.
  - fiddlerwoaroof 8y ago
    I mostly write Clojure because, unfortunately, it's nearly impossible to sell management on Common Lisp: ime, Clojure is a nice language, but it's very uneven because it's well-designed for the sorts of things the core team cares about and everything else is barely passed the MVP stage.
- njharman 8y ago
  The parent post did not say JVM, they said Java paradigms. Vastly different things. Writing Javaonic Clojure vs Clojuronic Clojure. So, trying to replicate the style/structure/paradigms of Java rather than learning and using the Clojure styles, structures and paradigms.
  - thom 8y ago
    Yes, I understand, and I contend that being able to do this, and leverage Java libraries bidirectionally in impure Java-y ways is an explicit, deliberate and fundamentally useful feature of Clojure. Unless you're trying to say that things like protocols are fundamentally un-Clojurey because they smell of OO or something in which case I just disagree.
    - thom 8y ago
      More widely, Clojure's pragmatism and the fact that it's not overly sniffy about what paradigm to use is one of its nicest features. If I wanted my programming language to make me feel bad about myself, then obviously I'd just use Haskell and be done with it.
- fulafel 8y ago
  No, CL looks quite long in the tooth when compared on ergonomics and ecosystem. It may run faster but otoh the Clojure concurrency story is great. There's also good IDE support for more enterprisey tastes (Cursive) in addition to the phb-scaring Emacs/vi, and ClojureScript is a huge selling point in many fields. The JVM has a lot of technical plus sides aside from the library interop - a lot of tooling such as Newrelic and Maven can be directly leveraged.

thom 8y ago

This is just blaming people for using Clojure's features though. If deep JVM integration wasn't a selling point, you'd use a vastly more mature Lisp, right?

ken 8y ago
A lot of us use Clojure despite the JVM, not because of it. Closure has a lot of (other) compelling features.
- fiddlerwoaroof 8y ago
  I mostly write Clojure because, unfortunately, it's nearly impossible to sell management on Common Lisp: ime, Clojure is a nice language, but it's very uneven because it's well-designed for the sorts of things the core team cares about and everything else is barely passed the MVP stage.
njharman 8y ago
The parent post did not say JVM, they said Java paradigms. Vastly different things. Writing Javaonic Clojure vs Clojuronic Clojure. So, trying to replicate the style/structure/paradigms of Java rather than learning and using the Clojure styles, structures and paradigms.
- thom 8y ago
  Yes, I understand, and I contend that being able to do this, and leverage Java libraries bidirectionally in impure Java-y ways is an explicit, deliberate and fundamentally useful feature of Clojure. Unless you're trying to say that things like protocols are fundamentally un-Clojurey because they smell of OO or something in which case I just disagree.
  - thom 8y ago
    More widely, Clojure's pragmatism and the fact that it's not overly sniffy about what paradigm to use is one of its nicest features. If I wanted my programming language to make me feel bad about myself, then obviously I'd just use Haskell and be done with it.
fulafel 8y ago
No, CL looks quite long in the tooth when compared on ergonomics and ecosystem. It may run faster but otoh the Clojure concurrency story is great. There's also good IDE support for more enterprisey tastes (Cursive) in addition to the phb-scaring Emacs/vi, and ClojureScript is a huge selling point in many fields. The JVM has a lot of technical plus sides aside from the library interop - a lot of tooling such as Newrelic and Maven can be directly leveraged.