iLemming

110 ms·

1. 1471.▲
   by iLemming 6y ago

   It does in the beginning. But if you want to become a serious Emacsen, it's better to learn some emacs-lisp.
2. 1472.▲
   by iLemming 6y ago

   I have used many popular and some esoteric editors and IDEs (some of them today would be considered forgotten). The last one was IntelliJ that I used very extensively. To the point of finding some undocumented features. I have participated
3. 1473.▲
   by iLemming 6y ago

   If you are a programmer, you are using [a subset of] Lisp already. Every single programming language that in use today was influenced by Lisp. Sadly, most of them dropped the main and arguably the most powerful feature of Lisp - homoiconici
4. 1474.▲
   by iLemming 6y ago

   The closest thing to a Lisp machine you can get today is if you use Lisp based window manager. StumpWM or EXWM.
5. 1475.▲
   by iLemming 6y ago

   I have a job. But thank you for your concern.
6. 1476.▲
   by iLemming 6y ago

   Same. Ironically, recursion is one of the main features pioneered in Lisp.
7. 1477.▲
   by iLemming 6y ago

   > That is not true anymore. GFM, ExtraMark, MultiMarkdown, MarkdownExtra, Gitlab, Taiga, Showdown, Markua, CommonMark, RMarkdown, etc., etc. I can promise you, there will be more flavors and extensions in the next 20 years. And if I&#x27
8. 1478.▲
   by iLemming 6y ago

   > emacs outshines all other editing software in approximately the same way that the noonday sun does the stars What makes Emacs genuinely great? Not that it was built a long time ago and withstood the test of time. Not the fact that it i
9. 1479.▲
   by iLemming 6y ago

   You have to understand that Spacemacs, Doom, ErgoEmacs, Prelude, etc. are not products. They are collections of recipes. And bare-bone Emacs is not a product either. Emacs is a kitchen where you use Lisp to bake your own editor/IDE&#x2
10. 1480.▲
    by iLemming 6y ago

    - Markdown is not consistent across the platforms that support it. If I wake you up at 3AM would you remember the format of links? is it parentheses first or brackets? - Extensibility. e.g.: I got tired of manually typing description of lin
11. 1481.▲
    by iLemming 6y ago

    If you use eww in Emacs, the readability of that post would be exactly as you wanted it to be, given that you've spent enough time configuring and tweaking your Emacs theme. Emacs (in general) is not for everyone - but it can be that p
12. 1482.▲
    by iLemming 6y ago

    You know that they are people who dismiss the theory of evolution and say something like: "God sprinkled the Earth with the dinosaur bones to test our faith"...
13. 1483.▲
    by iLemming 6y ago

    Repeat after me: "JVM is not Java." Clojure and Kotlin are the perfect proof of that. If you actually look closer, JVM is a pretty cool piece of technology. Too bad that it is doomed to be associated with Java forever.
14. 1484.▲
    by iLemming 6y ago

    Little known fact: Rich Hickey initially planned to target .Net CLR and JVM, so he wanted something that has "C", "L", "R", and "J" in the name, that's how Clojure got its name.
15. 1485.▲
    by iLemming 6y ago

    And don't forget Swift, named after the biggest philosopher of our time - Taylor Swift.
16. 1486.▲
    by iLemming 7y ago

    Although I haven't criticized Hooks, I humbly accept the fact that there are flaws in my argumentation. You are right.
17. 1487.▲
    by iLemming 7y ago

    Rum and Reagent added support for hooks mainly for compatibility. Never needed them before.
18. 1488.▲
    by iLemming 7y ago

    Have you actually used Clojurescript with React? Just any cljs library - Reagent, Rum, Re-frame, Fulcro? Maybe try it, perhaps then you'd understand why Clojure developers often get confused what problems every new hype cycle in JS&#x
19. 1489.▲
    by iLemming 7y ago

    You should watch Rich Hickey's "Simple made easy", to understand why "easy" is almost never better than "simple". FP programs are almost always simpler than similar OOP programs.
20. 1490.▲
    by iLemming 7y ago

    It's both sad and ironic how someone replied with "Ok boomer," SQL is based on relational algebra that dates to 1960-70ies, and GraphQL is based on graph theory that dates back to the 18th century. Many from the modern genera
21. 1491.▲
    by iLemming 7y ago

    Sadly, nobody mentioned datalog.
22. 1492.▲
    by iLemming 7y ago

    I should've probably clarified: It is difficult to grok Clojure code only in the beginning - when you are new to the language. To many beginners, Clojure code at first may not look very intuitive. That is why I'm suggesting to lea
23. 1493.▲
    by iLemming 7y ago

    First of all: every modern version of languages you mentioned has some basic FP primitives; second: most of the time, it's all about the logic (algorithm) and data transformations. Yes, sometimes, it feels weird, like trying to glue ev
24. 1494.▲
    by iLemming 7y ago

    > You will feel handicapped. You will be confused. For anyone who wants to learn Clojure (or any Lisp) from scratch, here's my advice: Don't try to learn it by reading books. What I mean: don't try to mentally parse and an
25. 1495.▲
    by iLemming 7y ago

    Clojure is still massively helpful to learn, even if it is not the primary language of use. It is guaranteed to make a better programmer from anyone who has never done Lisp or FP before. It is my go-to tool for prototyping - whenever I am n
26. 1496.▲
    by iLemming 7y ago

    The language itself is very stable. There were no breaking changes. You can pick up just any Clojure book (even old one), and probably 98% of it still be very relevant.
27. 1497.▲
    by iLemming 7y ago

    > After all, Python has a repl too, they just call it a shell. No. Most non-lispy (non-homoiconic) languages do not have "true" REPLs (and that includes Python as well). At best they are just that - interactive shells. To under
28. 1498.▲
    by iLemming 7y ago

    > how long our current short sighted computing culture overall can last. Well, we can keep adding new programming languages and keep "extending" javascript (borrowing every single good and a bad idea from those new languages) f
29. 1499.▲
    by iLemming 7y ago

    > You can replace clojure with 10 other languages I yet have to see a successful, big Java/C# project that withstands the test of time and built with a team of just a few engineers. Yes. Clojure is just a tool. A programming languag
30. 1500.▲
    by iLemming 7y ago

    Disagree with me on what? That Clojure typically requires fewer people for projects of similar size? There are plenty of companies building awesome, successful projects in Clojure today with teams of fewer than 10 engineers in them: CircleC