4 ms·

Nobody said you "need" REPL. Doing REPL driven programming is just more productive, hence it is considered the right way in the Clojure community. Heck, you don

Nobody said you "need" REPL. Doing REPL driven programming is just more productive, hence it is considered the right way in the Clojure community. Heck, you don't even "need" any higher level languages, you can write code in machine code, but that's besides the point. Your boast about your Lisp credentials is exactly the kind of things I caution against in the article. Your pride has prevented you from properly learning Clojure, which has a very different programming style from other Lisps. You are basically illustrating my point live, again.

klibertp 6y ago
> Nobody said you "need" REPL. Well, you did, quoting the article: > Yes, if you are not using the REPL, you are not doing Clojure right. or should I understand this another way? > but that's besides the point. True. I'm saying that if you need to code in a particular way to make good use of the REPL, then it's already worse than being able to use the REPL well without any special coding style. Erlang and Elixir are great examples of that. I also have a problem with you believing there even is one correct way to use any language, but that's bearable. You being so sure that you're the only one qualified to know anything about that correct way is much worse. EDIT: I just saw so many "revolutionary ways to write code" which were being pushed hard by people absolutely sure their methods are so much better, and which ultimately amounted to little more than a few percent improvement in productivity in the real world - in the best case. It makes me suspicious of any such claims. > Your boast about your Lisp credentials My? I said: > Nevermind me, but [...] So you're putting words in my mouth; further, I said nothing about my knowledge of Clojure, so this: > Your pride has prevented you from properly learning Clojure Is completely unwarranted. And offensive. Could you please stop?
- huahaiy 6y ago
  Then it is actually far worse than what I guessed. You know next to nothing about Clojure, but somehow feel that you are qualified to have an opinion about it. That doesn't look good, does it?
  - klibertp 6y ago
    What opinion about Clojure?! Where? You're jumping to conclusions without any basis, while trying to caution others not to jump to conclusions? I'm talking about the general ease of use of features in programming languages. If you need to code in a particular way to use a feature, then it's harder to use than if you didn't have to do this. Is that wrong? Could you provide any argument on why is it wrong? And yes, I use Clojure's REPL as an example, and give Erlang as a counterexample. Do you know Erlang? Are you able to compare? If yes, why don't you write about how you see that comparison? Instead of, you know, childishly fixating on things I never said. For your information, I do know more than "next to nothing" about Clojure. But you won't believe me either way, will you?

klibertp 6y ago

> Nobody said you "need" REPL. Well, you did, quoting the article: > Yes, if you are not using the REPL, you are not doing Clojure right. or should I understand this another way? > but that's besides the point. True. I'm saying that if you need to code in a particular way to make good use of the REPL, then it's already worse than being able to use the REPL well without any special coding style. Erlang and Elixir are great examples of that. I also have a problem with you believing there even is one correct way to use any language, but that's bearable. You being so sure that you're the only one qualified to know anything about that correct way is much worse. EDIT: I just saw so many "revolutionary ways to write code" which were being pushed hard by people absolutely sure their methods are so much better, and which ultimately amounted to little more than a few percent improvement in productivity in the real world - in the best case. It makes me suspicious of any such claims. > Your boast about your Lisp credentials My? I said: > Nevermind me, but [...] So you're putting words in my mouth; further, I said nothing about my knowledge of Clojure, so this: > Your pride has prevented you from properly learning Clojure Is completely unwarranted. And offensive. Could you please stop?

huahaiy 6y ago
Then it is actually far worse than what I guessed. You know next to nothing about Clojure, but somehow feel that you are qualified to have an opinion about it. That doesn't look good, does it?
- klibertp 6y ago
  What opinion about Clojure?! Where? You're jumping to conclusions without any basis, while trying to caution others not to jump to conclusions? I'm talking about the general ease of use of features in programming languages. If you need to code in a particular way to use a feature, then it's harder to use than if you didn't have to do this. Is that wrong? Could you provide any argument on why is it wrong? And yes, I use Clojure's REPL as an example, and give Erlang as a counterexample. Do you know Erlang? Are you able to compare? If yes, why don't you write about how you see that comparison? Instead of, you know, childishly fixating on things I never said. For your information, I do know more than "next to nothing" about Clojure. But you won't believe me either way, will you?