News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why I'm Productive in Clojure (2013) by vbuwivbiu on Sunday October 22, 2017 @03:24AM (#15525604)
function.(x,y,z)

(function x y z)

Re:Why I'm Productive in Clojure (2013) by civility on Sunday October 22, 2017 @04:58AM (#15525816)
I happen to like Lisp (well, Scheme at least), but I think a better comparison would be:

    let a = 123, b = 456, c = 789;
    # more code
vs:

    (let ((a 123)
          (b 456)
          (c 789))
          ; more code
     )
In many cases outside of function calls, there are more parens.
Re:Why I'm Productive in Clojure (2013) by TeMPOraL on Sunday October 22, 2017 @06:20AM (#15526030)
Well, a more accurate comparison would be like this:

  {
    let a = 123, b = 456, c = 789;
    # more code
  }
Because Lisp let explicitly defines its scope, while the first example inherits the scope from whatever it is embedded in.
Re:Why I'm Productive in Clojure (2013) by hellofunk on Sunday October 22, 2017 @05:01AM (#15525819)
And in Clojure:

     (let [a 123
           b 456
           c 789]
        ...)
Clojure syntax was designed with a clear and deliberate attempt to remove many of the parenthesis from lisp syntax. This is just a part of the greater design goal of offering very concise and elegant syntax in general, which is one of the reasons I keep coming back to it.
Re:Why I'm Productive in Clojure (2013) by mmargerum on Sunday October 22, 2017 @03:40PM (#15528524)
Speaking as a beginner, I find the pure lisp example easier to read than the one with the clojure literal syntax. I actually don’t like the []. I’m sure I’ll get used to it tho
Re:Why I'm Productive in Clojure (2013) by civility on Sunday October 22, 2017 @05:06AM (#15525826)
Yep, Clojure made some nice improvements (still 4 parens, however), but I just can't get excited about the JVM.
Re:Why I'm Productive in Clojure (2013) by technion on Sunday October 22, 2017 @06:05AM (#15525976)
The JVM does solve the distribution problem that's heavily frustrated me with other platforms.

I can create a great tool in Ruby for example, but asking a computer illiterate to run it in Windows isn't going to happen.

You can however hand that person a .jar from Clojure and ask them to run it.

Re:Why I'm Productive in Clojure (2013) by megaman22 on Sunday October 22, 2017 @06:10AM (#15525993)
Assuming they have Java installed. Which, in my experience, is less and less likely as time goes on, for random samplings of non-developer Windows boxes.
Re:Why I'm Productive in Clojure (2013) by kuschku on Sunday October 22, 2017 @06:14AM (#15526007)
Not anymore! Java now can link JVM, runtime, and your own modules into a bundle that just works and runs everywhere.

On Linux, you’re even able to compile most of it into a single binary.

Re:Why I'm Productive in Clojure (2013) by megaman22 on Sunday October 22, 2017 @06:17AM (#15526015)
Good to know. Does it tree-shake to cut down irrelevant stuff out of thefinal package?
Re:Why I'm Productive in Clojure (2013) by kuschku on Sunday October 22, 2017 @06:44AM (#15526099)
That’s exactly why Jigsaw and jlink were so important, because they provide exactly that.
Re:Why I'm Productive in Clojure (2013) by hellofunk on Sunday October 22, 2017 @05:19AM (#15525864)
> (still 4 parens, however)

My example has 2 parens.

Even if you're not excited about the JVM, ClojureScript is particularly productive for front end development, where I genuinely love it tremendously.

Re:Why I'm Productive in Clojure (2013) by vbuwivbiu on Sunday October 22, 2017 @05:20AM (#15525868)
well, ok but the comparison is moot when you consider that dense lets are rare in Lisp
Re:Why I'm Productive in Clojure (2013) by vbuwivbiu on Thursday November 02, 2017 @05:44AM (#15608988)
that should have been object.function(x,y,z) or function(x,y,z) - typo and it's too late to edit