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

Clojure: The Documentary, official trailer [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 94 posts

Re: Clojure: The Documentary, official trailer [video]

#51

Post by embedding-shape »

veqq wrote: post #49
barrell wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve been writing ClojureScript now for around a decade. I tried to get into Clojure many times, but as someone with no Java experience, the JVM really makes it unbearable. I ended up trying Elixir though and absolutely loved it. Both Clojure and Elixir really changed the way I think about programming. They’ve both basically ruined me as far as other languages go. Structural editing + repo driven development in Cloju…

https://janet-lang.org is already Clojure without the JVM

I feel like calling Janet "A Clojure" is doing both a disservice. It's more like a "Clojure-like but smaller on purpose" programming language, and it's also (self-described) for "exploratory programming, scripting, and fun side projects" rather than Clojure's intended target audience.

Nothing wrong with that, having different target audiences makes sense and is probably preferable, but Janet is more than just "Clojure without the JVM" much like C# is more than just "Java without the JVM".

Re: Clojure: The Documentary, official trailer [video]

#52

Post by embedding-shape »

midnight_eclair wrote: post #34
lo_zamoyski wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> virtually all abstractions are built on top of primitive data types Obviously. The point being made is that the Clojure style discourages building DSLs and the like and prefers to remain close to Clojure types and constructs. It departs in various ways from traditionally Lisps.

> Clojure style discourages building DSLs does it really? https://github.com/simongray/clojure-dsl-resources

I think you're talking past each other.

"DSLs" can both mean "Using the language's variant of 'arrays' to build a DSL via specific shapes" like hiccup in Clojure does, and also "A mini-language inside of a program for a specific use case" like Cucumber is its own language for acceptance testing, but it's "built in in Ruby" in reality.

Clojure favors the "DSLs made out of shapes" rather than "DSLs that don't look/work like lisp inside of our programs".

Re: Clojure: The Documentary, official trailer [video]

#53

Post by waffletower »

abeppu wrote: post #42
yakshaving_jgt wrote: post #17

> `a -> a`; `[a] -> [a]`; It means nothing! It tells you nothing ! — Rich Hickey, Effective Programs [0] [0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2V1FtfBDsLU&t=4020s --- A disastrously poor take. I used to work at a Clojure company, and there's no chance I'd ever go back to that.

I worked for a startup that used clojure and found it so frustrating because, following the idiomatic style, pathways passed maps around, added keys to maps, etc. For any definition which received some such map, you had to read the whole pathway to understand what was expected to be in it (and therefore how you could call it, modify it, etc). I think the thing is that yes, `[a] -> [a]` tells you relatively little abo…

I think the pipeline paradigm you speak of is powerful, and some of the clarity issues you claim can be improved through clear and consistent use of keyword destructuring in function signatures. Also by using function naming conventions ('add-service-handle' etc.) and grouping functions in threading forms which have additive dependencies, can also address these frustrations.

Re: Clojure: The Documentary, official trailer [video]

#54

Post by joshlemer »

embedding-shape wrote: post #43
midnight_eclair wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

clojure itself is a joy to use, on the web or outside of it BUT it doesn't have the equivalent of rails, mostly because lispers are an opinionated bunch and can't come together to agree on how web development should be done the frameworks that do exist are more of a collections of libraries with some plumbing to connect the dots

Which in reality isn't a problem, once you absorb the ideas of Clojure and try to apply them when using Clojure. Composition of well picked libraries beat batteries-included frameworks for most use cases, both short term and long term, at least in 99% of the cases I'm writing Clojure/Script code.

I think it actually is a pretty big problem. "Once you absorb the ideas of Clojure" takes months or years to fully get. Composing libraries yourself, like your comment says, requires that they are "well-picked". Stitching together separate libraries is really time consuming and a distraction from the project you're trying to build. It also results in pointless thrashing within a team as everyone has become personally invested in their own mosaic of hand-selected libraries for every little thing. By the time a beginner learning Clojure has researched and put together their web stack and got it all hooked up and is ready to start, the Django developer already shipped their project last quarter, iterated on it a few times, and is on to the next thing.

One big library/framework has huge benefits and network effects, from enabling a big 3rd party plugin ecosystem, to a deeper documentation literature (including paid courses, books, and AI). It means that there's less or virtually zero getting up to speed when changing from one project to an other. It means that the upstream framework team takes care of upgrades whereas you have to consider, when a new technology comes up, how to integrate this into your stack. There's a reason that Laravel, Django, Rails, and Spring each have thousands or hundreds-of-thousands of times more websites in production than all of Clojure combined.

At a meta/discourse level, I also find the Clojure community's tendency to constantly deny and downplay any criticism or even just issue that people face to be really frustrating and counter productive.

Re: Clojure: The Documentary, official trailer [video]

#55

Post by NeutralForest »

waffletower wrote: post #48
NeutralForest wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would love to use Clojure but there are basically no jobs in my area with the language. Seems like the Nordics like Clojure but I'd need to move. The very good backwards compatibility is attractive but as the result of the small community, there's also a lot of abandoned packages and fewer QoL packages (formatters, linters, etc); I know there are some but for example I had setup `cljfmt` in Emacs and it wouldn't wo…

There are still Clojure remote positions. Thankfully, I have used Clojure professionally long enough that my core ability shouldn't atrophy too much now that we have moved away from it at my current position. I am looking forward to Jank actually.

Why did you move from it if I may ask?

Re: Clojure: The Documentary, official trailer [video]

#57

Post by jimbokun »

midnight_eclair wrote: post #35
coolThingsFirst wrote: post #21

Is this lang for web dev?

clojure itself is a joy to use, on the web or outside of it BUT it doesn't have the equivalent of rails, mostly because lispers are an opinionated bunch and can't come together to agree on how web development should be done the frameworks that do exist are more of a collections of libraries with some plumbing to connect the dots

Yes, huge selling point in favor of Clojure!

Re: Clojure: The Documentary, official trailer [video]

#58

Post by agency »

jwr wrote: post #10

I've been running my business for 10 years now, relying on Clojure and ClojureScript. It is amazing to be able to base one's livelihood on a foundation that is so stable and well designed. Clojure has been designed by a very smart and very experienced person, and it shows. It has then been maintained and extended by a team built around a culture of maturity and stability, and the result is something you can rely on.…

Simple Made Easy[https://www.infoq.com/presentations/Simple-Made-Easy/] in particular had a huge impact on the way I think about writing software at a formative time in my development/career. I have not had the chance to use Clojure professionally, but thinking about software in terms of "intertwining" is the idea I return to when evaluating software designs, regardless of technology, and gave me a way to articulate what makes software difficult to reason about.

Re: Clojure: The Documentary, official trailer [video]

#59

Post by midnight_eclair »

joshlemer wrote: post #54
embedding-shape wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which in reality isn't a problem, once you absorb the ideas of Clojure and try to apply them when using Clojure. Composition of well picked libraries beat batteries-included frameworks for most use cases, both short term and long term, at least in 99% of the cases I'm writing Clojure/Script code.

I think it actually is a pretty big problem. "Once you absorb the ideas of Clojure" takes months or years to fully get. Composing libraries yourself, like your comment says, requires that they are "well-picked". Stitching together separate libraries is really time consuming and a distraction from the project you're trying to build. It also results in pointless thrashing within a team as everyone has become personally…

yep, every word.

Re: Clojure: The Documentary, official trailer [video]

#60

Post by jimbokun »

joshlemer wrote: post #54
embedding-shape wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which in reality isn't a problem, once you absorb the ideas of Clojure and try to apply them when using Clojure. Composition of well picked libraries beat batteries-included frameworks for most use cases, both short term and long term, at least in 99% of the cases I'm writing Clojure/Script code.

I think it actually is a pretty big problem. "Once you absorb the ideas of Clojure" takes months or years to fully get. Composing libraries yourself, like your comment says, requires that they are "well-picked". Stitching together separate libraries is really time consuming and a distraction from the project you're trying to build. It also results in pointless thrashing within a team as everyone has become personally…

Have you seen this?

https://www.infoq.com/presentations/Simple-Made-Easy/

Post reply on HN