71–80 of 101 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Does any other language even come close to this? Smalltalk
Interesting. But one of the points of Clojure is to get away from the object-oriented way so I'm not sure that I'd like Smalltalk.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I can't really do it in Python and it makes me sad. That really bugs me with a great many popular languages. There's a REPL, but the libraries and tooling don't really embrace it.
The only tools I've found with decent support for Python and other languages are all emacs based. Same goes for the Clojure and CL ones, actually. It's no surprise, I suppose, because this style of programming is so natural to an emacs user. But it's difficult with Python as soon as you try to do anything beyond a single module. CL and Clojure have proper packages and namespaces so it works fine. But in Python you're…
Glad to see more work being done on the general purpose data browser concept. I've been spending occasional free moments working on one since 2014[0], and this is the first time I've come across something with any significant overlap in conception[1]. It still blows my mind that I can describe the concept to programmers (and/or show a video demo) and have the most typical response be along the lines of, "but what wou…
> It still blows my mind [...] the typical response is along the lines of, "but what would you use it for?" [...] When is it not useful to see the data your code is operating on? Status Quo? (the status quo being... print statements?) Another easy example of a long available better model that is still niche/ignored: pipelines in PowerShell [1] are clearly superior in many fronts, but people prefer keep parsing plain…
PowerShell sounds great and I'm sure there are some people who are very productive with it but it's ultimately a silo. It's never going to be as low-friction to support as text.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interesting. But one of the points of Clojure is to get away from the object-oriented way so I'm not sure that I'd like Smalltalk.
If I understand it correctly, Smalltalk is really nothing like Java and the mainstream OOP that Clojure is a reaction to.
From the license: > You may not use REBL for commercial use.
I think the exciting thing is the datafy protocol, not necessarily this particular viewer. What he demoed seemed much more like a proof-of-concept. Like he said, he's excited to see what the Clojurescript community comes up with, and so am I. I might take a shot at building a browser in Emacs, though that takes away some more dynamic display opportunities.
From the license: > You may not use REBL for commercial use.
Honest question, how do we interpret "commercial use"? I'd assume it means you cannot sell REBL itself or a derivative, not that you cannot use it as a developer tool to build your project, which kind of makes sense.
I wouldn't want to read too much into this particular prototype of REBL. I think they don't want to have people re-package this iteration and sell it as-is.
Smalltalk has had this type of thing for years... https://gtoolkit.com/
But Smalltalk is all about managing state and Clojure is all about immutability, no?
Glad to see more work being done on the general purpose data browser concept. I've been spending occasional free moments working on one since 2014[0], and this is the first time I've come across something with any significant overlap in conception[1]. It still blows my mind that I can describe the concept to programmers (and/or show a video demo) and have the most typical response be along the lines of, "but what wou…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I still fail to see how methods are not data in the general sense, but while trying to answer my own question, it seems that "data" in clojure means roughly "Either an atomic type[1] or a collection" 1: an "atom" in clojure is not what it is in traditional lisp lingo; is there a name in clojure for type that is roughly the union of: symbol, number, character, boolean ? perhaps "primitive"?
This concept is pretty subtle. Rich Hickey does a great job at explaining it (as always) in "Are We There Yet?"[1]. He deconstructs objects into state (attributes) and behavior (methods), and then uses values (or data) to represent state, and functions to represent behavior. Give that a watch a couple of times to get a better handle on what all this means from the Clojure perspective. [edit] To answer your other ques…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I understand it correctly, Smalltalk is really nothing like Java and the mainstream OOP that Clojure is a reaction to.
I think if things have private state that can't be seen externally and that's idiomatic then there's a conflict, if not then there isn't. Do you think it's worth learning Smalltalk? Is it still possible?
I think it's worth learning, even if you never use it.