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

ClojureScript, Lisp's Revenge [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 36 posts

Re: ClojureScript, Lisp's Revenge [video]

#21

Post by Rapzid »

mattdw wrote: post #7

I really like Clojure (and have enjoyed David Nolen's CLJS tutorials and guides), but I find ClojureScript to have terribly arcane tooling. Despite being familiar with Clojure, it's still 10 minutes of cargo-culting and copy-pasting before I can start actually working on a ClojureScript project. Slightly ironic for a language which places such an emphasis on removing "incidental complexity."

Yeah but once you get it going.. And discovering LightTable's insta REPL for the first time is almost spiritual.

Re: ClojureScript, Lisp's Revenge [video]

#22

Post by klibertp »

skrebbel wrote: post #13
macmac wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Emacs is your thing, which it should be if you do Clojure, DPPs starter project Spiffy, will give you very decent setup in a couple of minutes. https://github.com/dragonmark/spiffy

> If Emacs is your thing, which it should be if you do Clojure, This is the kind of attitude that keeps people away from your language. The amount of people who shun away from C# simply because they don't like the idea of Windows / Visual Studio should be a hint.

> This is the kind of attitude ...

And it's unfounded. Thanks to Lisps unusually regular syntax adding support for semantic editing features (paredit-like) should be rather straightforward in any editor. And accidentally paredit is also enough to make coding any Lisp way more pleasant than editing raw code in other languages.

See http://emacsrocks.com/e14.html for an overview.

I'm actually kind of disappointed that in the demo I saw adding parens manualy, one at a time, instead of using wrap-sexp etc.

Re: ClojureScript, Lisp's Revenge [video]

#23

Post by weavie »

klibertp wrote: post #18
weavie wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is definitely more powerful than Javascripts...

You mean it's better than Sweet.js? http://sweetjs.org/

No, I haven't looked into sweetjs enough. I was just referring to raw javascript macros.. (ie. non existent).

Re: ClojureScript, Lisp's Revenge [video]

#25

Post by nickik »

klibertp wrote: post #18
weavie wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is definitely more powerful than Javascripts...

You mean it's better than Sweet.js? http://sweetjs.org/

> Sweet.js brings the hygienic macros of languages like Scheme and Rust

So it seams to clojure macro system is more powerful. That said that does not mean its better.

Re: ClojureScript, Lisp's Revenge [video]

#26

Post by minikomi »

mattdw wrote: post #7

I really like Clojure (and have enjoyed David Nolen's CLJS tutorials and guides), but I find ClojureScript to have terribly arcane tooling. Despite being familiar with Clojure, it's still 10 minutes of cargo-culting and copy-pasting before I can start actually working on a ClojureScript project. Slightly ironic for a language which places such an emphasis on removing "incidental complexity."

I definitely felt the same but there's quite a few bits of tooling popping up now - lien-mies for a very quick first step, and more powerful bits like figwheel, which makes itterating in the browser with om really shine.

Re: ClojureScript, Lisp's Revenge [video]

#27

Post by ode »

ANTSANTS wrote: post #17
skrebbel wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If Emacs is your thing, which it should be if you do Clojure, This is the kind of attitude that keeps people away from your language. The amount of people who shun away from C# simply because they don't like the idea of Windows / Visual Studio should be a hint.

That's more of a Lisp problem than a Clojure problem. All the Expert Lisp Programmers settled on Emacs many moons ago (as in decades past) and no one has bothered to write another (good) Lisp-friendly text editor since. And well, you can't really write Lisp without a suitable text editor, so all the Lisp neophytes either give up or learn to cope with emacs and eventually forget about replacing it.

Could you explain what you mean by a reasonable text editor? Thanks

Re: ClojureScript, Lisp's Revenge [video]

#28

Post by klibertp »

weavie wrote: post #23
klibertp wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean it's better than Sweet.js? http://sweetjs.org/

No, I haven't looked into sweetjs enough. I was just referring to raw javascript macros.. (ie. non existent).

Right, in general languages without any means of syntactic abstraction feel contrived to me now, and after working with several macro-enabled languages I really want to have support for them in more places. JS (Sweet.js), along with Dylan and Nimrod (and others) showed that it's possible to have real macros in non-prefix languages - I wonder how long it will take the "mainstream" to become comfortable with this feature. It looks like it takes anywhere between 20 to 40 years on average for concepts to "enter mainstream", so I think we're going to have to wait quite a long time yet.

Re: ClojureScript, Lisp's Revenge [video]

#29

Post by klibertp »

nickik wrote: post #25
klibertp wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean it's better than Sweet.js? http://sweetjs.org/

> Sweet.js brings the hygienic macros of languages like Scheme and Rust So it seams to clojure macro system is more powerful. That said that does not mean its better.

Of course, Sweet.js provides means for breaking hygiene.

Also, Clojure macros are kind-of, a-little-bit hygienic, with their rules for identifiers resolution.

Anyway, I'd say they're rather similar in expressivity and capabilities, but I don't know both macro systems well enough to do detailed comparison.

Re: ClojureScript, Lisp's Revenge [video]

#30

Post by lgas »

ode wrote: post #27
ANTSANTS wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's more of a Lisp problem than a Clojure problem. All the Expert Lisp Programmers settled on Emacs many moons ago (as in decades past) and no one has bothered to write another (good) Lisp-friendly text editor since. And well, you can't really write Lisp without a suitable text editor, so all the Lisp neophytes either give up or learn to cope with emacs and eventually forget about replacing it.

Could you explain what you mean by a reasonable text editor? Thanks

I suspect he means one that has paredit.
Post reply on HN