51–60 of 151 posts
Clojure is a lot of fun to tinker with, but man… I love my static types. I think I’d hate to work on a large codebase in Clojure and constantly be wondering what exactly “m” is.
One of the myriad reasons why Common Lisp is far superior to Clojure is the ability to (declare (type Integer m))
> Each new layer of complexity fed my developer ego. I'm unable to understand this mindset. All the time I read things like "Developers love complexity because it feeds their egos" but I've never encountered a situation in which added complexity made me more proud of the work. Just the opposite: being able to do more made me more proud of the work I put in, and complexity was the price I paid for that ability. The gr…
Because Clojure treats data as first-class citizens, we could build our own lightweight conflict resolution system using pure functions that operate on these transactions.
Interesting story. I am not entirely convinced that all credit should go to the programming language here, though. My theory is that communicating abstractions is hard. If you work on your own, or in a (very) small team, you can come up with powerful abstractions that allow you to build amazing systems, quickly. However, sharing the underlying ideas and philosophy with new team members can be daunting. As systems gro…
Incredible history, I feel like Clojure makes magic. What I like about functional programming is that it brings other perspectives of how things CAN work!!
Congratulations by the life change
Because Clojure treats data as first-class citizens, we could build our own lightweight conflict resolution system using pure functions that operate on these transactions. What does it mean to say Clojure "treat data a first-class citizen"? I understand FP would treat function as first-class citizen, but the statement seems to mean something different.
Because Clojure treats data as first-class citizens, we could build our own lightweight conflict resolution system using pure functions that operate on these transactions. What does it mean to say Clojure "treat data a first-class citizen"? I understand FP would treat function as first-class citizen, but the statement seems to mean something different.
The two sentences around the one you quoted should answer the question as well:
> With Clojure, we modeled the entire collaboration system as a stream of immutable data transformations. Each user action becomes a transaction in our system.
> When conflicts occur, our system can merge changes intelligently because we're working with pure data structures rather than complex objects.
In particular with clojure, data structures tend to be immutable and functions tend to not have side effects. This gives rise to the benefits the article talks about, though is not without its own drawbacks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I find the opposite to be true, that best and most productive developers tend to be more language agnostic than average, although I'm not saying they don't have their preferences. Specifically, I find language evangelists particularly likely to be closer to .5x than 5x. And that's before you even account for their tendency to push for rewriting stuff that already works, because " is the future, it's going to be great…
Yeah, this has been my experience too. The mentality seems similar to "productivity hackers" who spend more time figuring out the quickest, most optimal way to do a thing than people who just do the thing.
> Each new layer of complexity fed my developer ego. I'm unable to understand this mindset. All the time I read things like "Developers love complexity because it feeds their egos" but I've never encountered a situation in which added complexity made me more proud of the work. Just the opposite: being able to do more made me more proud of the work I put in, and complexity was the price I paid for that ability. The gr…
Big long lived code bases are all about this battle against complexity and the speed at which you can add new or update features largely comes down to how well you’re doing at management of complexity.