3 ms·
The "j" is always what put me off from learning Clojure. I've had too many bad experiences with JDKs and JVMs that I stay a thousand kilometers away from any th
by dheera 2y ago
The "j" is always what put me off from learning Clojure. I've had too many bad experiences with JDKs and JVMs that I stay a thousand kilometers away from any thing that has "J" in it unless it's referring to JavaScript.
- rads 2y agoCheck out Babashka. It's a single binary that runs Clojure without a JVM. It also starts up really fast and has a much lower base memory requirement: https://github.com/babashka/babashka https://github.com/babashka/babashka It's pretty easy to switch to writing JVM Clojure if you're familiar with Babashka. Most of the libraries written for Babashka are designed to work in either environment. That said, there are reasons you may want to use the Clojure on the JVM later on. It might be interesting to read the replies to another poster with similar concerns about the JVM: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40445415 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40445415
- KingMob 2y agoInteresting. Usually the reluctance comes from people confusing Java the language with JVM the platform.
- ertucetin 2y agoYou can also try ClojureScript, which runs on JavaScript. If you're developing frontends.
- kaba0 2y agoWell, there aren’t too many more stable platforms out there, so your experience elsewhere couldn’t be all that cloudless either.