3 ms·

> > And what about using persistent data structures by default > You can do that in CL if you like to. When you do this by default you do get a completely dif

by mtrimpe 13y ago

> > And what about using persistent data structures by default > You can do that in CL if you like to. When you do this by default you do get a completely different ecosystem of libraries though, which is one of Clojure's key advantages over CL. > CL doesn't have a host language. Another one of Clojure's key features is that it's designed to be easy to implement on a host language. That choice has some disadvantages such as forgoing the elegant condition system of CL in favor of plain old exceptions, but it also enables the practical use of Clojure and it's persistent data structures on a varied collection of host languages. > CL's community may feel arrogant at first, but with time you will notice it was justified We all know the Smug Lisp Weeny stereotype. I had the pleasure of talking with the original smug lisp weeny (smuglispweeny.blogspot.com) a couple of years ago about his OpenCells library which I still love as one of the most elegant solutions in computing. OpenCells never went anywhere serious though but the Clojure ecosystem is starting to develop it's own version of the concept which runs on the browser right away and is already driving demo iOS and Android apps. So yes, Clojure might not have the history of CL behind it and has less of a history of drawing bright minds into an ivory tower which contains infinite beauty but which rarely, if ever, makes down to earth. You could say that makes it a toy, but if I had to place a bet on which language will have the biggest impact from now on then I'm pretty sure which language I would put my money on.

mrottenkolber 13y ago
> When you do this by default you do get a completely different ecosystem of libraries though, which is one of Clojure's key advantages over CL. This isn't even an argument. "Because its new." > Another one of Clojure's key features is that it's designed to be easy to implement on a host language. You just made that up. Clojure was designed to be able to run on the JVM. When implementing Clojure from scratch you will have to emulate the JVM. So the guys who will maybe (I don't think anybody will remeber Clojure in 10 years) do that in ten years will curse rich hickey. I am not comment on the rest, because it has no content.
- weavejester 13y ago
  > This isn't even an argument. "Because its new." I think you're mistaking the parent poster's argument. Immutability is at its most useful when it's the norm, rather than the exception. For this to work, the core language needs to very strongly encourage immutability, to the point where in-place mutability is considered something only useful for low-level performance tweaks. It's not that Clojure is new - there are plenty of older languages that have a strong core of immutability. The point is that it needs to be at the core of the language in order to be pervasive. > You just made that up. Clojure was designed to be able to run on the JVM. No he didn't. The Clojure rationale page talks about separating languages from platforms, and this subject has come up often in talks and on the mailing list. Clojure has already been ported to Javascript, and there are various projects to implement Clojure in Python, Ruby, C and Lua - that I know of. There's also a lot of current work going on in abstracting out the Clojure analyser and compiler, both to bootstrap the language, and to make it easier to derive ports.
  - mrottenkolber 13y ago
    > I think you're mistaking the parent poster's argument. Immutability is at its most useful when it's the norm, rather than the exception. For this to work, the core language needs to very strongly encourage immutability, to the point where in-place mutability is considered something only useful for low-level performance tweaks. I don't think so. What you are saying is you can only program in way X if your language forces you to, which is obviously wrong? I think people just are not used to using a language that doesn't force you to do anything at all (e.g. lisp). You can only program in way X if your language _allows_ you to. What language allows you to program in any way and even lets you easily modifiy the language to do whatever you want? Lisp. > The Clojure rationale page talks about separating languages from platforms, and this subject has come up often in talks and on the mailing list. Then they made that up. ClojureScript is not the same as Clojure. They did a pretty horrible job at seperating their language from their platform. I know because I get Java stack traces all day. I also have to use inferior language primitives dues to Clojure's Java-centrism every day.
    - 13y ago

by mtrimpe 13y ago

mrottenkolber 13y ago

> When you do this by default you do get a completely different ecosystem of libraries though, which is one of Clojure's key advantages over CL. This isn't even an argument. "Because its new." > Another one of Clojure's key features is that it's designed to be easy to implement on a host language. You just made that up. Clojure was designed to be able to run on the JVM. When implementing Clojure from scratch you will have to emulate the JVM. So the guys who will maybe (I don't think anybody will remeber Clojure in 10 years) do that in ten years will curse rich hickey. I am not comment on the rest, because it has no content.

weavejester 13y ago
> This isn't even an argument. "Because its new." I think you're mistaking the parent poster's argument. Immutability is at its most useful when it's the norm, rather than the exception. For this to work, the core language needs to very strongly encourage immutability, to the point where in-place mutability is considered something only useful for low-level performance tweaks. It's not that Clojure is new - there are plenty of older languages that have a strong core of immutability. The point is that it needs to be at the core of the language in order to be pervasive. > You just made that up. Clojure was designed to be able to run on the JVM. No he didn't. The Clojure rationale page talks about separating languages from platforms, and this subject has come up often in talks and on the mailing list. Clojure has already been ported to Javascript, and there are various projects to implement Clojure in Python, Ruby, C and Lua - that I know of. There's also a lot of current work going on in abstracting out the Clojure analyser and compiler, both to bootstrap the language, and to make it easier to derive ports.
- mrottenkolber 13y ago
  > I think you're mistaking the parent poster's argument. Immutability is at its most useful when it's the norm, rather than the exception. For this to work, the core language needs to very strongly encourage immutability, to the point where in-place mutability is considered something only useful for low-level performance tweaks. I don't think so. What you are saying is you can only program in way X if your language forces you to, which is obviously wrong? I think people just are not used to using a language that doesn't force you to do anything at all (e.g. lisp). You can only program in way X if your language _allows_ you to. What language allows you to program in any way and even lets you easily modifiy the language to do whatever you want? Lisp. > The Clojure rationale page talks about separating languages from platforms, and this subject has come up often in talks and on the mailing list. Then they made that up. ClojureScript is not the same as Clojure. They did a pretty horrible job at seperating their language from their platform. I know because I get Java stack traces all day. I also have to use inferior language primitives dues to Clojure's Java-centrism every day.
  - 13y ago