My Increasing Frustration with Clojure
ashtonkemerling.com
My Increasing Frustration with Clojure
1–10 of 240 posts
Re: My Increasing Frustration with Clojure
#2Time to go back to Tcl.
Re: My Increasing Frustration with Clojure
#3what an annoying post. no real content, but an author desperately trying to prove he's smart.
"To say that I was treated pretty shabbily by David Nolen on this issue almost goes without saying."
Re: My Increasing Frustration with Clojure
#4I'm not a clojure user but I am a fan of Rich's talks so I am kinda taken aback by this - this is just not the kind of Clojure I was expecting from what I know of the principles Rich preaches.
I really was expecting belt and braces defensive error checking and never ever giving a dud result.
Re: My Increasing Frustration with Clojure
#5what an annoying post. no real content, but an author desperately trying to prove he's smart. "To say that I was treated pretty shabbily by David Nolen on this issue almost goes without saying."
I would say he backs up his claims quite well, unlike your comment. He gave ample evidence at his frustrations with the progress of the language - what did you find annoying about it?
Re: My Increasing Frustration with Clojure
#6Clojure is not a community-driven language. It belongs to Rich Hickey and by extension Cognitect. The bugs that will be fixed and the features that will be added are the ones Hickey cares about. Not saying this is good or bad. It's just how Clojure development is ran.
Re: My Increasing Frustration with Clojure
#7what an annoying post. no real content, but an author desperately trying to prove he's smart. "To say that I was treated pretty shabbily by David Nolen on this issue almost goes without saying."
I would say he backs up his claims quite well, unlike your comment. He gave ample evidence at his frustrations with the progress of the language - what did you find annoying about it?
I see a lot of issues but not a lot of PRs. As a maintainer there is a lot of prioritization going on, and it seems that the things that bother the blog author are not things that bother the maintainers. I also agree with some of the replies on the issues - garbage in garbage out for a function is ok behavior.
One of the cool things about clojure and other languages like this is that these things can often be fixed at runtime - so even if your fix doesn't get accepted you can have a "my-better-fixes" lib you pull in for yourself. A "consistent-set-opts" lib you add to your project.cls for example.
Re: My Increasing Frustration with Clojure
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would say he backs up his claims quite well, unlike your comment. He gave ample evidence at his frustrations with the progress of the language - what did you find annoying about it?
I see a lot of issues but not a lot of PRs. As a maintainer there is a lot of prioritization going on, and it seems that the things that bother the blog author are not things that bother the maintainers. I also agree with some of the replies on the issues - garbage in garbage out for a function is ok behavior. One of the cool things about clojure and other languages like this is that these things can often be fixed a…
In what way is "garbage in garbage out" better than consistent handling and explicit failure, especially for something so well-defined mathematically? That's sort of a lazy argument, imo.
I shouldn't need to pull in more libs for baseline language expectations, either. Core libraries are what languages really are, much more important than just syntax.
Re: My Increasing Frustration with Clojure
#9Once I tried to make a union of a sorted set and an unsorted one. Result set inherits behaviour of a bigger input set so when i first got my sometimes-sorted set i thought like loosing my mind.
Re: My Increasing Frustration with Clojure
#10what an annoying post. no real content, but an author desperately trying to prove he's smart. "To say that I was treated pretty shabbily by David Nolen on this issue almost goes without saying."
I would say he backs up his claims quite well, unlike your comment. He gave ample evidence at his frustrations with the progress of the language - what did you find annoying about it?
I clicked through to the github exchange he links to, and I don't think you can call that shabby treatment. Perhaps a bit too terse (though I don't think so), but it's just saying "the docs say data must meet requirement X, and that's good enough".
His other examples sound prima facie troubling (I don't know enough clojure to have a real opinion), but he's miss-characterizing that interaction.