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

Clojure 1.11 is now available

clojure.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 74 posts

Re: Clojure 1.11 is now available

#51

Post by haolez »

gmfawcett wrote: post #50
haolez wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

About the syntax. I tend to prefer Scheme because (, [ and { mean the same thing, whether in Clojure they are different constructs. How do you feel about this minor point?

> (, [ and { mean the same thing... That's not a feature of Scheme. It must be a feature of the implementation you use. (Which one?) E.g. in R7RS, [ ] and { } are explicitly reserved for future language extensions. https://standards.scheme.org/official/r7rs.pdf

My last Lisp project was using Racket, but when it was called PLT Scheme. It's been a long time since then :)

Re: Clojure 1.11 is now available

#54

Post by nanomonkey »

amelius wrote: post #40
nanomonkey wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GraalVM has made creating Clojure binaries with quick launch times much more possible. I suggest checking out babashka (Closure bash scripting) as an example and as a means.

Does that also work on embedded platforms with limited resources?

No idea, I doubt it.

There is Ferret [https://ferret-lang.org/] if you want Clojure compiled to C++11.

For microcontrollers, I've always used uLisp or plain C.

Re: Clojure 1.11 is now available

#55

Post by freshhawk »

haolez wrote: post #42
silver-arrow wrote: post #12

So thankful to be programming in Clojure the past few years. Thank you, Clojure Team, for all you do! My favorite things about using Clojure: 1. Runs on the JVM. Battle tested, tons of libraries, and well engineered. 2. Immutable Data Structures. I wouldn't want to live without this safety ever again. 3. LISP syntax - so simple to remember and just basically code functions! I also find reading Clojure code very simpl…

About the syntax. I tend to prefer Scheme because (, [ and { mean the same thing, whether in Clojure they are different constructs. How do you feel about this minor point?

I think the clojure syntax, with those symbols differentiated, is a pretty great choice.

The choice of default meanings is good too, lists/application, indexed sequences and k/v mappings are useful widely used primitive constructs (clojure makes sets (the math meaning, unordered collection, no dupes) with #{} which is handy).

It cleans up the code nicely, having these literals, and now I find non-clojure styles to be a bit annoying to read with the extra noise from contructor function calls.

And when describing data/DSLs using these literals people generally carry the general meanings over, so things can be a bit more intuitive. And in a lot of places just using ('s and ['s in a way that makes it easy to disambiguate them when reading some DSL or literal value also makes for nicer reading of code (just in terms of a bit less mental parsing effort).

I'm the type to not be immediately a fan of extra syntax added to a lisp, but I've been convinced that edn notation is pretty wonderful and I've been converted.

Re: Clojure 1.11 is now available

#56

Post by robertfw »

phtrivier wrote: post #28
buzzwords wrote: post #8

I do wonder what has to happen for greater adoption of Clojure.

- ease the onboarding. Every few months I try to give clojure another shot, and every few months _some_ part of the setup has changed and / or is broken. - compile to small binaries that run fast. I get what the langage gets from the JVM, but those 5,10 seconds I get before _anything_ runs, even after I had everything compiled ? - show me an example of how having 'spec' is going to help me refactor the code that I go…

> - ease the onboarding. Every few months I try to give clojure another shot, and every few months _some_ part of the setup has changed and / or is broken.

What are you finding that is breaking? Backwards compatibility is pretty stellar in the language

Re: Clojure 1.11 is now available

#57

Post by KingMob »

robertfw wrote: post #56
phtrivier wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

- ease the onboarding. Every few months I try to give clojure another shot, and every few months _some_ part of the setup has changed and / or is broken. - compile to small binaries that run fast. I get what the langage gets from the JVM, but those 5,10 seconds I get before _anything_ runs, even after I had everything compiled ? - show me an example of how having 'spec' is going to help me refactor the code that I go…

> - ease the onboarding. Every few months I try to give clojure another shot, and every few months _some_ part of the setup has changed and / or is broken. What are you finding that is breaking? Backwards compatibility is pretty stellar in the language

Probably referring to the docs. I myself am irritated at the pace of change of all the clj command-line options.

In general, Clojure still has poor documentation compared to more popular languages.

Re: Clojure 1.11 is now available

#58

Post by orestis »

fuzzythinker wrote: post #48

If you have been filtering out clojure due to dislike of JVM, give it a try with GraalVM either directly [1] or via Babashka [2]. GraalVM will in most cases not only run your code much faster than JVM, but cuts startup time from seconds down to msecs [3][4], not to mention compiling to native with c api or LLVM. With Babashka, it packages a subset of GraalVM so you don't have to install that but is more limited. So i…

A nitpick: Your code will not run faster in GraalVM vs the JVM, it will start faster. If its small scripts where the startup time dominates, then of course it goes faster. For anything long-lived (even in the range of tens of seconds), the JVM has better performance.

Re: Clojure 1.11 is now available

#59

Post by fnordsensei »

orestis wrote: post #58
fuzzythinker wrote: post #48

If you have been filtering out clojure due to dislike of JVM, give it a try with GraalVM either directly [1] or via Babashka [2]. GraalVM will in most cases not only run your code much faster than JVM, but cuts startup time from seconds down to msecs [3][4], not to mention compiling to native with c api or LLVM. With Babashka, it packages a subset of GraalVM so you don't have to install that but is more limited. So i…

A nitpick: Your code will not run faster in GraalVM vs the JVM, it will start faster. If its small scripts where the startup time dominates, then of course it goes faster. For anything long-lived (even in the range of tens of seconds), the JVM has better performance.

To be fair, it might run faster as well, or not. It seems to vary from case to case.

Re: Clojure 1.11 is now available

#60

Post by kimi »

edgyquant wrote: post #47
skwog wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Clojure data structures are immutable [1], core to its principles. 1 https://clojure.org/reference/data_structures

Ah okay that’s cool then. I thought you were calling out some low level implementation detail of lisp I had overlooked. I’m trying to build a lisp as the intermediate of my new toy programming language. So I wanna get that right.

No it's a Clojure thing. Other lisps may vary.
Post reply on HN