4 ms·
Right. Actually a lot of the issues Bicking points out were handled by Lisps years ago. And you don't have to give op on objects per se: Objects in Clojure (wit
by nickbauman 13y ago
Right. Actually a lot of the issues Bicking points out were handled by Lisps years ago. And you don't have to give op on objects per se: Objects in Clojure (with ad-hoc typing) can be treated as maps and darned near anything is seq-able in that Lisp dialect! Having s-expressions and macros lets you traverse and recombine things you could only imagine doing in Python. And don't even get me started on the power of laziness in Clojure.
Don't get me wrong: Python pays the bills these days. And that language is an able workhorse. But boy do I miss Clojure. The reason I don't use it at work is that I work in Android, iOS and Google App Engine most of the time. Which means Java, Python and Objective-C. The code world has infantilized away from Lisp too far.
- weavejester 13y agoObjects in Clojure are an implementation detail of the JVM. Clojure doesn't really use objects as objects. Records are, essentially, just maps with some type metadata attached. They're implemented as classes purely for performance purposes.