5 ms·
Nobody was talking about Clojure. Do you also have to hijack CL discussions now? Taking over the term "Lisp" wasn't enough?
by mrottenkolber 12y ago
Nobody was talking about Clojure. Do you also have to hijack CL discussions now? Taking over the term "Lisp" wasn't enough?
- mrottenkolber 12y agoYup downvote me. Because this isn't obviously a CL thread. What a nice display of Clojure propaganda, when in a CL thread, a related library is scored lower than a clojure library.
- S4M 12y agoWhy all this hate about Clojure? I didn't downvote you, but I can see why people would, seems olenhad was mentioning a library similar to Parsec in a language that is very related to Common Lisp. There is definitely no need to get carried away.
- copergi 12y agoIf there's one thing SLWs hate, it is other SLWs.
- jessaustin 12y agoSLW? Single-language... weirdo?
- aerique 12y agoSmug Lisp Weenie
- mrottenkolber 12y agoConsider the fact that I am probably the only one in this thread who is actually getting paid to write Clojure. And yes Clojure is horrible.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- S4M 12y agoI am honestly curious what you have against Clojure. I dabbed with CL and Clojure, not as much as I would have liked to, but for me they felt similar. I would be curious to have a list of things that can easily be achieved with CL but not with Clojure.
- lispm 12y agoCommon Lisp is a multi-paradigm language (imperative, functional, object-oriented) in the Lisp 1 / Maclisp tradition. It has a language spec and multiple different, but very compatible, implementations. Among its goals are portability across different machines/systems, efficiency, power and stability. Thus complex Lisp software can be ported or written in Common Lisp and usually runs on top of several implementations (examples: Maxima, Axiom, ACL2, ACT-R, Common Lisp Music, ...). "Clojure is predominantly a functional programming language, and features a rich set of immutable, persistent data structures. When mutable state is needed, Clojure offers a software transactional memory system and reactive Agent system that ensure clean, correct, multithreaded designs."
- lispm 12y agovery related = fully incompatible
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- sanderjd 12y agoThings can be both incompatible and related. For any given thing, the set of things related to that thing will typically be bigger than and encompassing of the set of things compatible with that thing.
- lispm 12y agoAbsolutely true. Lisp is related to Fortran, though both are not compatible to each other. Just like Clojure.
- sanderjd 12y agoI guess I don't really get your point. Is Clojure not a pure enough Lisp for your taste, or what? I've used Clojure and CL a similar (small) amount, and they seem incredibly more similar to each other than either of them to Fortran.
- lispm 12y agoFor me languages which are fully incompatible and allow no code sharing are not VERY related. Languages VERY related to CL are Emacs Lisp, ISLisp and some other Lisps in the Lisp 1 / Maclisp tradition.
- lispm 12y agoMore food for the downvoters: Clojure has been carefully designed such that ZERO code sharing with any other Lisp dialect is possible. That's its definition of 'very related'.
- mrottenkolber 12y agoI just saw your aprils fools joke. Epic?
- mrottenkolber 12y agoYou meant "hype about Clojure" right?
- marijn 12y agoYou're being downvoted for displaying a primitive tribal attitude about proglangs, not because there's a grand Clojure conspiracy working against you.