abp

I'm just digging into pedestal myself.

There are no problems with Leiningen solved. It's based on it like other Clojure libs with project templates etc.

With Compojure it's another story, it only gives you a handler function. Pedestal makes a routing table available, enabling reverse routing. The route definition is data based. It's less repetitive to define routes.

> I'm sure its an excellent framework, but there way too much for me to consider using it right now. My concerns: How difficult would it be to switch out Datomic for PostgreSQL?

Not difficult at all? Have you looked at the datomic tutorial? It does nothing besides setting up a connection and querying the database. What dbs do not support that?

>What if I don't want ClojureScript at this moment? What happens if I want to switch X with Z or drop ABC? How hard will it be to minimize and erase all the things I don't want?

Well, you go through and pick the libraries you want to use?

> Why are there so many extra words needed for the routing templates?

It's a comprehensive description of all aspects of the flexible routing dsv, including the programatic inteface to define routes at runtime.

> I've always felt Clojure would get a boost from a Rails-like framework, but I'm concerned that a large, opinionated framework will break the very promise of Clojure: flexibility and easy DSL creation. Once we are faced with something that needs to be reverse-engineered or broken, then this promise is ruined.

It's not rails. We've all seen where that got.

> I'm all for new frameworks and ideas, but its a little funny to think that Noir was dropped, in part, for being too large and complicated.

It's a set of libraries, not a framework.

Also, it doesn't add state for everything everywhere. Instead it takes the current concept of Clojure web apps and takes it to the next level.

In Compojure you define lots of routes, mostly calling separate handling functions, only passing out the routes parameters. That what pedestals routing does by default. That's just one example of many.

???

2. Java has hella libraries. I mean hella. You can find a library for almost anything. Lisp...not so much.

Clojure?

3. Java is a language for doing things. Lisp is not a language for doing things. I'll change my mind when I see a 2m+ line codebase that's been in production for ten years.

Emacs?

Is one of them better in any form?

http://www.infoq.com/presentations/Simple-Made-Easy-QCon-Lon...

Now it is on there and all I see everytime it get's up here is people complaining, saying they won't fund because of xyz or don't think it will succeed without blurb. Even better: Some get destructive and say how much better Eclipse or the likes are.

Please stop this shit, don't fund, don't use, don't complain and please don't raise such shitstorms on every single Light Table discussion. Can we probably focus a little on being constructive about projects like this?

Wait, what? I really looked forward to this one since I read the slides when they appeared. Then i watched a portion of the talk and skipped to your exciting demos, because I couldn't understand anything you said.

Is there any possibility to get a new video with the other stream?

And you can't do those things based on your framework in either, a general config of the app or a simple declarative manner, that fits into a simple function that decides which view to render, based on data?

Also shouldn't form validation be a mapping of data to your "domain objects" and let them decide if they're valid?