Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why I'm Productive in Clojure

yogthos.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 99 posts

Re: Why I'm Productive in Clojure

#11

Post by andrewvc »

Touche wrote: post #7

My biggest problem with Clojure (specifically ClojureScript) is that it's too workflow opinionated. Nearly all Clojure devs use 1 of 2 text editors. Nearly everyone uses Leiningen. Nearly everyone uses some sort of auto-builder. Nearly everyone uses hot-swapping. Clojure wasn't even optimized for this workflow, it's just the only one that works. So as much as I love the language I keep going away from it because I pr…

Well, people do use these tools, but honestly, do you really want a language with multiple build tools / package managers? The java world is a mess here. Leiningen is pretty great, no need to fragment the community.

As far as editors go, I'm perplexed. You can use nearly any editor, why do you perceive the need to use one of these 2?

Re: Why I'm Productive in Clojure

#12

Post by [deleted] »

Touche wrote: post #6
yawn wrote: post #4

I'm curious to see how Clojure fares against the current crop of folks becoming intrigued by statically-typed languages like Haskell, F#, etc.

Why should it fare against them at all? statically and dynamically typed languages have happily coexisted since John McCarthy designed Lisp.

[deleted]

Re: Why I'm Productive in Clojure

#13

Post by Touche »

willismichael wrote: post #9
Touche wrote: post #7

My biggest problem with Clojure (specifically ClojureScript) is that it's too workflow opinionated. Nearly all Clojure devs use 1 of 2 text editors. Nearly everyone uses Leiningen. Nearly everyone uses some sort of auto-builder. Nearly everyone uses hot-swapping. Clojure wasn't even optimized for this workflow, it's just the only one that works. So as much as I love the language I keep going away from it because I pr…

I'm curious what language and workflow you prefer? In my opinion, there are plenty of other technologies (quite popular ones at that) that have a specific workflow considered "best practice", arguably because "it's just the only one that works".

I prefer any language that requires nothing more than a text editor (any) and possibly a compiler. Where you can use any build system you want and be pretty much just as productive.

I agree that there are other languages that suffer the same problem, the .NET languages for example (except kinda F#), but there are plenty that do not (C, JavaScript, etc).

Re: Why I'm Productive in Clojure

#14

Post by mjt0229 »

Touche wrote: post #7

My biggest problem with Clojure (specifically ClojureScript) is that it's too workflow opinionated. Nearly all Clojure devs use 1 of 2 text editors. Nearly everyone uses Leiningen. Nearly everyone uses some sort of auto-builder. Nearly everyone uses hot-swapping. Clojure wasn't even optimized for this workflow, it's just the only one that works. So as much as I love the language I keep going away from it because I pr…

Java has Maven, Scala has SBT, Clojure has Leiningen. That's not so bad. I use all three languages, and the appropriate tool for the language. I don't use hot-swapping for anything.

For IDEs, in Clojure, you have the choice of Vim, Emacs, Cursive (for IntelliJ), Light Table, and Counterclockwise (for Eclipse), and more. All of them are good, pick your favorite.

Re: Why I'm Productive in Clojure

#15

Post by nmac »

I recently migrated to clojure from the php world. I have to say that although I am still learning the language, its actually fun compared to php, which would sometimes feel like pulling teeth to get some basic functionality. Way less boilerplate, and as can be said of anything good, it just works.

Also, the idea of thinking in the problem domain versus the subset of problems that arise in languages like php is an acute difference. Just being able to focus on the product as your programming keeps you on task and thinking about new ways to implement features, etc. -- big difference.

Re: Why I'm Productive in Clojure

#16

Post by mjt0229 »

Touche wrote: post #13
willismichael wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious what language and workflow you prefer? In my opinion, there are plenty of other technologies (quite popular ones at that) that have a specific workflow considered "best practice", arguably because "it's just the only one that works".

I prefer any language that requires nothing more than a text editor (any) and possibly a compiler. Where you can use any build system you want and be pretty much just as productive. I agree that there are other languages that suffer the same problem, the .NET languages for example (except kinda F#), but there are plenty that do not (C, JavaScript, etc).

C brings in its own problems. Compiler (in)compatibilities, the need to install libraries on a machine to be able to compile and run programs. And besides, in C you still have a build system problem - Make is fine, but it is definitely opinionated about how things happen, and you potentially have to write a lot more boilerplate to get a complex project built with Make than you do for Leiningen, Maven, SBT, etc.

Re: Why I'm Productive in Clojure

#17

Post by willismichael »

Touche wrote: post #13
willismichael wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious what language and workflow you prefer? In my opinion, there are plenty of other technologies (quite popular ones at that) that have a specific workflow considered "best practice", arguably because "it's just the only one that works".

I prefer any language that requires nothing more than a text editor (any) and possibly a compiler. Where you can use any build system you want and be pretty much just as productive. I agree that there are other languages that suffer the same problem, the .NET languages for example (except kinda F#), but there are plenty that do not (C, JavaScript, etc).

Well, sure you can use whatever tools you want for C, JS, etc., but then when you contribute to a project in which somebody else made the decisions (either on the job or an open source side project), then you have to learn a whole different set of workflow tools, including all of their quirks and bugs. To me, it's a breath of fresh air to be able to look at a Clojure project and immediately know where to go to find out what dependencies are pulled in, know how to run the project, etc., instead of having to dig through somebody's mad collection of Bash scripts that invoke some weird build tool that I haven't been exposed to.

Re: Why I'm Productive in Clojure

#18

Post by willismichael »

S4M wrote: post #3
dj-wonk wrote: post #2

> What matters to me in a language is whether I can use it without thinking about it. I love this statement. It reminds me of the what it feels to be good at mathematics (not my words): "Your intuitive thinking about a problem is productive and usefully structured, wasting little time on being aimlessly puzzled." from http://www.quora.com/Mathematics/What-is-it-like-to-understa... The author also says more about math…

> Any language that lets you spend your brainpower on the essence of the problem is a tremendous advantage and joy. This unlocks creativity and productivity. For some reason the only language that let me reach this level is Python. I tried Clojure and Common Lisp, but for some reason I could never be as efficient as I wanted with them, which I think is a shame because in some ways I think the Lisps are superior to Py…

I really like Python, and use it on a daily basis but I found that after enough experience in Clojure, I prefer it when I have the choice and there isn't a compelling reason to use Python instead.

This isn't a criticism by the way, I do understand that people have different preferences of language idioms, and I do occasionally find myself scratching my head about the idiomatic Clojure way to solve a problem that wouldn't have been so hard for me in Python.

Re: Why I'm Productive in Clojure

#19

Post by Touche »

mjt0229 wrote: post #16
Touche wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I prefer any language that requires nothing more than a text editor (any) and possibly a compiler. Where you can use any build system you want and be pretty much just as productive. I agree that there are other languages that suffer the same problem, the .NET languages for example (except kinda F#), but there are plenty that do not (C, JavaScript, etc).

C brings in its own problems. Compiler (in)compatibilities, the need to install libraries on a machine to be able to compile and run programs. And besides, in C you still have a build system problem - Make is fine, but it is definitely opinionated about how things happen, and you potentially have to write a lot more boilerplate to get a complex project built with Make than you do for Leiningen, Maven, SBT, etc.

You don't have to use Make, there are a half a dozen other popular build systems.

Re: Why I'm Productive in Clojure

#20

Post by sanderjd »

beat wrote: post #8
yawn wrote: post #4

I'm curious to see how Clojure fares against the current crop of folks becoming intrigued by statically-typed languages like Haskell, F#, etc.

I have a friend who is deeply into modern static-typed languages (Haskell and OCaml), but has worked professionally for a couple of years in Clojure. His big gripe with Clojure is that it's still dynamically typed, and thus vulnerable to type-based uncertainties. In languages like OCaml, lots of bugs are actually syntax errors and will be caught at compile time. On the other hand, Clojure is at least a functional lan…

Has your friend used core.typed[0]? I haven't really, but I've wondered if it might be the perfect balance for people who really miss their type system.

[0]: https://github.com/clojure/core.typed

Post reply on HN