4 ms·
> Clojure is much, much less complex then Scala and it is functional and OO. Yes, but it doesn't even have types! (Except clojure-typed, which is so cumbersome
by frowaway001 12y ago
> Clojure is much, much less complex then Scala and it is functional and OO.
Yes, but it doesn't even have types! (Except clojure-typed, which is so cumbersome and verbose that it's faster to just write Java.)
- nickik 12y agoIf you really belive that core.typed makes clojure as verbose as Java then you have not looked at it. Also, its not like people use clojure over java because they dont have to write down types. There are tons of other reasons people use clojure. Also, core.typed can do things that java can not. > Yes, but it doesn't even have types! While I understand what you mean, you should write down what you mean. Clojure has types, but not static typing.
- frowaway001 12y ago> Also, core.typed can do things that java can not. Isn't that a very low bar? > Clojure has types, but not static typing. Types are – by definition – static.
- yogthos 12y agoFrom what I've seen core.typed isn't all that much more verbose than Scala annotations and certainly a hell of a lot more readable.
- frowaway001 12y ago(defalias AnyMonad "A monad with bind, result, and optionally zero and plus." (TFn [[m :< (TFn [[x :variance :covariant]] Any)]] '{:m-bind (All [x y] [(m x) [x -> (m y)] -> (m y)]) :m-result (All [x] [x -> (m x)]) :m-zero (U (All [x] (m x)) Undefined) :m-plus (U (All [x] [(m x) * -> (m x)]) Undefined)})) If you say so ...
- yogthos 12y agonot really sure what the problem here is...