News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Clojure Design Patterns by noncoml on Friday November 24, 2017 @03:00PM (#15772708)
> “If functional programming is so great, why is it still niche? We have a product that can practically eliminate runtime errors, make refactoring much easier, lighten the testing burden, all while being quite delightful to use. What’s the hold up?”

I think they are over-estimating how much people care about runtime errors.

Re:Clojure Design Patterns by hellofunk on Friday November 24, 2017 @06:40PM (#15773629)
I agree. I've worked in both Elm and ClojureScript. In one, I have to constantly deal with compiler errors. In the other, about as much runtime errors. The net time for error handling is the same. But the net time in actually writing code is in favor of ClojureScript, which requires at least half as many lines as Elm (and often much less than half).

Error handling is somewhat over-emphasized in comparison to other things that affect productivity (and maintainability).

Re:Clojure Design Patterns by threeseed on Friday November 24, 2017 @03:34PM (#15772872)
Especially on the JVM where most exceptions need to be explicitly handled and the ones that aren't can be handled in a way that doesn't impact users.
Re:Clojure Design Patterns by noncoml on Friday November 24, 2017 @05:16PM (#15773319)
elm-lang is a front-end only language compiled to JS(at the moment).

JVM doesn’t apply hence.