3 ms·

This seems like an opportunity to plug the good work https://www.clojuriststogether.org/ https://www.clojuriststogether.org/ do. They do good work. Plug conclud

by roenxi 2y ago

This seems like an opportunity to plug the good work https://www.clojuriststogether.org/ https://www.clojuriststogether.org/ do. They do good work. Plug concludes. Clojure - like many languages - seems to be benefiting a lot from the work the IDE people have been putting in to good infrastructure. A lot of the magic is being moved out of Emacs towards tools like Treesitter and the LSP server which are more platform independent. Not a huge amount to do with Clojure per say, but the Clojure ecosystem is benefiting a lot from it. The Emacs specific stuff is becoming very Emacs-specific (like paraedit, bless its socks).

diggan 2y ago
I think Clojure has benefit way more from nRepl and everything in that ecosystem, than LSP and that newfangled stuff, at least my personal setup relies on nRepl and doesn't even use LSP afaik.
waffletower 2y ago
I am wary of LSP. I should try LSP again using eastwood, which probably has its trade-offs. While I absolutely admire Borkdude's many gifts to the Clojure community, the lack of static analysis in clj-kondo is a non-starter for me -- macro support is painfully manual. Because of its speed, clj-kondo likely is more performant in an editor LSP context, but too opinionated for me.
- iLemming 2y ago
  I don't know what you're talking about; it feels to me like you're complaining that your camel isn't a Ferrari. Clojure is inherently very dynamic - fully automatic static analysis of Clojure code is extremely difficult. Not just Clojure - any other Lisp too. Do you think that for almost four decades of Emacs Lisp existence, nobody built a deep static analysis tool only because people were just stupid, lazy, or had no incentives? Kondo is actually considered the best-in-class tool for Clojure linting/analysis, and its manual macro configuration is a practical compromise given the language's design. > macro support is painfully manual. If programming was effortless, I would have no job, I bet you wouldn't have either.

by roenxi 2y ago

diggan 2y ago

I think Clojure has benefit way more from nRepl and everything in that ecosystem, than LSP and that newfangled stuff, at least my personal setup relies on nRepl and doesn't even use LSP afaik.

waffletower 2y ago

I am wary of LSP. I should try LSP again using eastwood, which probably has its trade-offs. While I absolutely admire Borkdude's many gifts to the Clojure community, the lack of static analysis in clj-kondo is a non-starter for me -- macro support is painfully manual. Because of its speed, clj-kondo likely is more performant in an editor LSP context, but too opinionated for me.

iLemming 2y ago
I don't know what you're talking about; it feels to me like you're complaining that your camel isn't a Ferrari. Clojure is inherently very dynamic - fully automatic static analysis of Clojure code is extremely difficult. Not just Clojure - any other Lisp too. Do you think that for almost four decades of Emacs Lisp existence, nobody built a deep static analysis tool only because people were just stupid, lazy, or had no incentives? Kondo is actually considered the best-in-class tool for Clojure linting/analysis, and its manual macro configuration is a practical compromise given the language's design. > macro support is painfully manual. If programming was effortless, I would have no job, I bet you wouldn't have either.