3 ms·

Clojure on Racket would be pretty sweet.

• packetlost 4y ago
  Yeah, the only thing holding me back from going all in on Clojure is the JVM's chunkyness and the lack of a good type system. I'd love to see Haskell's type system grafted onto a Clojure-flavored Lisp.
  • mjhay 4y ago
    I've never used it, but you might be interested in Shen [0]. There's also Babushka, which is a lightweight interpreted backend for Clojure [1] that is very practical for scripting, etc. [0] https://shenlanguage.org/ https://shenlanguage.org/ [1] https://github.com/babashka/babashka https://github.com/babashka/babashka
    • packetlost 4y ago
      I'm familiar with Babashka, Shen looks very interesting. Thank you!
  • nequo 4y ago
    You might enjoy Typed Racket. Clojuresque square brackets and statically checked type annotations: https://docs.racket-lang.org/ts-guide/ https://docs.racket-lang.org/ts-guide/
    • packetlost 4y ago
      Not a fan of typed Racket. It feels like grafting a type-system onto a Lisp with macros, which is, IMO, not sufficient. The syntax in particular is ugly and creates unnecessary separation between bindings and their types. Also gradual typing is little bit of worst of both worlds, coming from a heavily typed Python codebase.
      • nequo 4y ago
        > creates unnecessary separation between bindings and their types I like this in Haskell/Agda/Idris because it makes the function definition easier to read while still keeping the type signature in view. Interesting. Like they say, de syntaxibus non est disputandum.