4 ms·
To me, Clojure is about as productive as banging out a script in Ruby. It's way more productive than writing the same thing in any language where I can't (easil
by jcromartie 15y ago
To me, Clojure is about as productive as banging out a script in Ruby. It's way more productive than writing the same thing in any language where I can't (easily, or at all) just fire up a REPL and start hacking.
I can actually just crank out code that I use. It can be quick and messy. Clojure is not concerned with type theory and provable correctness.
But the end result of a quick hack, in Clojure, is often something (or is made of of parts) that can be applied to other problems by pulling it out into a library, or by abstracting one more argument to a function, etc..
I think someone like Gabriel Weinberg could get along just fine in Clojure, with much the same spirit as hacking Perl, but maybe with better results.
- swah 15y agoI kinda regret having chosen Clojure for my project. Its not that I can't express ideas in very little code, its just that my workflow is different from languages like Python. In Clojure, it seems that I can't apply the method of spike solution (http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?SpikeSolution http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?SpikeSolution) and then refactor it into working code like I do with languages like Python or C.
- jcromartie 15y agoI'm wondering what about spikes doesn't work in Clojure? I usually understand a spike as a "proof of concept" that doesn't handle all of the edge cases.
- seancorfield 15y agoI'm curious why you feel you can't create spike solutions in Clojure?
- swah 15y agoProbably because pseudocode in my head is imperative.
- mnemonicsloth 15y agoI think that's normal. Part of learning Clojure is learning to think in another kind of pseudocode. What does this imply about the languages you already know?