5 ms·
This is why I use Clojure. I can do Functional, OOP, logic, or any of the dozens of other programming styles in one language. And since it's a lisp I don't have
by timbaldridge 14y ago
This is why I use Clojure. I can do Functional, OOP, logic, or any of the dozens of other programming styles in one language. And since it's a lisp I don't have to worry about having to need extra syntax from the language writers to get what I want.
Pragmatic languages FTW!
- spicyj 14y agoI interpreted the OP suggesting that you not use a single multiparadigm language because then you won't be forced to follow the new principle everywhere. Of course, it's possible to do (for example) OOP in a lisp-like language, but you'll really be forced to work with it in a language like Java, which may give you a deeper understanding.
- jfb 14y agoWell, avoid Java, which is just C++--, and think Smalltalk instead.
- klez 14y agoTherefore Java == C?
- jfb 14y agoWell, only shittier.
- evincarofautumn 14y agoI don’t think programming languages have inverses, so in general λ + 1 − 1 ≠ λ.
- oskarkv 14y agoYour comment gives the impression that Clojure is a big multiparadigm mess. But it is not. Clojure's design is clean and simple. Clojure is mostly functional. Sure, since it's a Lisp one can kind of incorporate other paradigms with macros. But out of the box Clojure does not do Java-style OOP (except for interop) or Prolog-style logic.
- timbaldridge 14y agoPerhaps it does place oriented OOP poorly, but it actually has an extremely nice logic engine (see core.logic).
- oskarkv 14y agoYeah, I know about it, but it's an additional dependency, right? [org.clojure/core.logic "0.7.5"] Whatever, Clojure is clean and simple is what I wanted to say. :)