Clojure and the technology adoption curve
blog.juxt.pro
Clojure and the technology adoption curve
1–10 of 65 posts
Re: Clojure and the technology adoption curve
#2In my mind you are not leaving OO behind when you get into Clojure, but the big conceptual challenges revolve around doing things in an immutable way. It is obvious how to do some things and not to do others.
Re: Clojure and the technology adoption curve
#3In my mind you are not leaving OO behind when you get into Clojure, but the big conceptual challenges revolve around doing things in an immutable way. It is obvious how to do some things and not to do others.
Reading the books such as "The Joy of Clojure" and "Clojure Applied" helped me to leave the OO behind when getting into Clojure.
Re: Clojure and the technology adoption curve
#4I am having a lot of trouble trying to understand the hype behind functional programming. I have read McCarthy's paper on LISP, completed Odersky's course on Scala etc. No revelation so far ( yes, maybe I am stupid, but I won't admit it ). Is it only useful for study as a model that inspired modern programming languages ? For example :
"obvious power of code becoming data."
Many languages have eval() where data can be treated as code.
Re: Clojure and the technology adoption curve
#5In my mind you are not leaving OO behind when you get into Clojure, but the big conceptual challenges revolve around doing things in an immutable way. It is obvious how to do some things and not to do others.
Reading the books such as "The Joy of Clojure" and "Clojure Applied" helped me to leave the OO behind when getting into Clojure.
I've been going through "Clojure for the Brave and True". It's been great so far, it does a good job of explaining out functional programming.
Though I already had one foot in that realm with playing around with Racket and learning Scheme in college.
Re: Clojure and the technology adoption curve
#6In my mind you are not leaving OO behind when you get into Clojure, but the big conceptual challenges revolve around doing things in an immutable way. It is obvious how to do some things and not to do others.
As an example there's an essay at
http://www.lispcast.com/solid-principles-in-clojure
which elaborates on SOLID OO design in Clojure and provides some code examples. For example there's a pretty clear example of the right way to apply SRP to a functional paradigm.
I'd interpret it as you need SOLID to do successful OO (required but not sufficient), but using as much SOLID as reasonably possible under any paradigm also happens to result in good/better software. In that way there can be a lot of confusion about what is OO and what is merely usually found nearby OO but isn't OO specific.
Re: Clojure and the technology adoption curve
#7Probably worth noting that a lot of the companies with an interest in Clojure cited as Early Majority are simply non-Clojure companies that picked up an Early Adopter startup as an acquisition and need to continue development and does not necessarily represent greenfield Clojure development at that company (I know this for a fact regarding one of the companies cited on the list, suspect the same for a few of the others.)
While Clojure foundered a bit after its start in the race to become Java.next I think that what has ended up saving it, or at least given it new life that it really needed, is a particular combination that is not even mentioned anywhere in the article: Clojurescript and React wrappers like Om and Reagent. I know more people considering Clojure(script) as a path to a combined web app and mobile app (via React-native) than I do people looking at Clojure to power the back-end.
Re: Clojure and the technology adoption curve
#8I am having a lot of trouble trying to understand the hype behind functional programming. I have read McCarthy's paper on LISP, completed Odersky's course on Scala etc. No revelation so far ( yes, maybe I am stupid, but I won't admit it ). Is it only useful for study as a model that inspired modern programming languages ? For example : "obvious power of code becoming data." Many languages have eval() where data can b…
One main goal of functional programming is writing less error prone code. When mapping a function over a sequence there's no way to get an off by one error, or any other bug associated with typical for loop.
Not a lot of aspects of functional programming are tied to the code is data idea (formally called homoiconicity). However when writing Clojure, the user is actually inputting Clojure data structures. Something I've noticed is structural navigation inside the editor has beneficial. I can edit Clojure code so much faster than any algol-family (C-like) language I've used. And while I find it important to spend more time thinking than typing, it's easier for me to stay in flow when the code is so malleable.
Re: Clojure and the technology adoption curve
#9I am having a lot of trouble trying to understand the hype behind functional programming. I have read McCarthy's paper on LISP, completed Odersky's course on Scala etc. No revelation so far ( yes, maybe I am stupid, but I won't admit it ). Is it only useful for study as a model that inspired modern programming languages ? For example : "obvious power of code becoming data." Many languages have eval() where data can b…
Traverse a hashmap, remove all strings with an even key string size and sort it by the last character in the string, then add the string size to the integer (here you have a list of integers) and sum the product of the numbers at index 0 and n-1, 1 and n-2, ...
Compare the the code size in Java and Clojure.
If that is not enough, do the same thing but start with java objects (and their clojure equivalent: a hashmap) for some given object/map property.
EDIT: And if that is not enough, use as property of the object a string, defined only during run-time by a user input.
Re: Clojure and the technology adoption curve
#10I am having a lot of trouble trying to understand the hype behind functional programming. I have read McCarthy's paper on LISP, completed Odersky's course on Scala etc. No revelation so far ( yes, maybe I am stupid, but I won't admit it ). Is it only useful for study as a model that inspired modern programming languages ? For example : "obvious power of code becoming data." Many languages have eval() where data can b…
I had many revelations while reading and doing the exercises of the SICP book.