5 ms·
>If we used interop for everything mundane, Clojure would really just be an S-expression shaped husk over Java code. Not a very good solution. IMO some program
by georgeoliver 4y ago
>If we used interop for everything mundane, Clojure would really just be an S-expression shaped husk over Java code. Not a very good solution.
IMO some programmers pursue purity (no pun intended) over pragmatism, at their own expense. I understand the appeal, it's like hand planing a board with your vintage No. 8 instead of sending it through the Powermatic.
- janetacarr 4y agoI understand this. Contrary to what I wrote, I do use interop to get work done when I have to, but it's certainly not an inviting solution.
- seabird 4y agoIt's a lot more like buying a board planing robot cell, replacing the robot with a human operator because you couldn't get a teach pendant for it, replacing the automated part loading/unloading because you're now running parts that your fixtures can't handle, and ultimately replacing your low-cycle-time planer with a Powermatic because the vendor went under and you can't get any spare parts. Now you just have a Powermatic with a human operator and a distant memory of your initial machine. You (at least should be) picking oddball stuff like Clojure because the unique advantages outweigh the problems. If you're just using it as a wrapper over another language that doesn't provide those advantages, you're taking the balls off the bull, and you probably should have just used Java, C#, Go, etc.