Hi,
I've a different take on the entire thing. Based on my experience I have
realized the following:
1. A lot of software engineers do not have a CS background. Out of them,
many joined this field for the fun of coding and are willing to learn new
things. I know many like that. However, I feel a large majority of them are
those for whom Java is probably what Software development basically is.
(This has been a boon and bane of Computer Science. It reduces the barrier
to entry, but also prevents them from appreciating the true beauty. Many can
code a web application, thanks to Rails, Hibernate and the like without even
having an idea of what B-tree is) Everything begins and ends with Java. They
don't even know anything about C/C++.
And I think it would be foolish to assume that Clojure acceptance will
reach critical mass unless it is accepted by this group of people.
2. Second issue is Bosses (higher-ups) and convincing them is hard.
Language features and the beauty of Lisp is not going to convince them. The
biggest problem is I think when they realize that they will have to loose
all the Imperative programming skills they have acquired all over these
years and now they will be on equal footing with the rest when it comes to
Functional programming experience.
3. Sad as it is, most of the work gets done by Copy-paste work and unless
there is a online cookbook type thing, people will find it hard.
Unless Clojure (not just Clojure, any functional programming language)
reduces this barrier to entry for both the non-core developers and the
Bosses, I think any FP language will find it hard.
Now, if we want Clojure to get accepted fast, I think we must be eager to
reduce this barrier to entry. Just saying that "If you can program in LISP"
then you can code Clojure is not a very smart answer. Similarly saying "get
used to parenthesis" is not a smart answer either.
*It's really wrong to think that if they do not accept Clojure they are
doomed. The users have a higher hand and if not Clojure, new languages will
keep on being built until some language gets accepted by all. *
I think what needs to be done is the following:
1. In LISP like languages, Parenthesis is a non-issue as long as code is
properly indented. And hence *strictly following indenting rules* while
defining functions/Macros etc. is really really crucial. Hence my next
point.
2. Excellent IDE indenting support for code Indentation. I have tried
Enclojure and it is good. But what I find is difficult for the LISP newbie
is deciding when to put code on the new line for function arguments and all
that. I know that there are rules for that (most Scheme like), but frankly
speaking, people have become very lazy and wouldn't waste time reading the
indenting rules, especially when the other Haskell,F#, Scala camp boasts to
address the same issues and say that we do it all without a lot of
parenthesis. *So in short, Can we do something in the IDE to make Clojure
code indentation a totally no-brainer?*
Perhaps Enclojure must show some *placeholders* properly indented based
on whether it is defmacro, defn or fn etc and the developer just fills it
up. This would be an excellent aid in promoting LISP indenting standards.
Overtime, once Clojure is widespread people will automatically start
doing it correctly.
3. A nice and good article written by Clojure folks that highlights how
to transition from the OOPS thinking to Functional thinking.
1. Just saying "Practice coding recursively" does not help at all.
Even core CS people do not use recursion for every thing these days.
Students have OS labs, Networking Labs and projects but everyone
knows that
it does not involve much of recursion and all - just a plain sequence of
operations, that's all. At most 2-3 courses on Algorithms is
where they use
Recursion heavily.
2. I think the keyword "let" and the pipeline is very understated.
"let" is the single most important thing that makes this transition easy.
4. Have an article that has some decent functions in it and each should
have an explanation of how an experienced Clojurian/LISPian would read this
code mentally. Just write it as a transcript. Or may be a Screen cast.
5. Have a cookbook like article for all common tasks.
6. Explain how idiomatic code looks like in Clojure. I feel experienced
Lispers can help in this. It feels very scary when an experienced OOPS
developer knowing all idiomatic code in OOPS does not know anything in LISP.
I'm afraid to say that this feeling of shame must be prevented. After all,
writing idiomatic LISP code is not rocket science. It is just lack of
experience
*I personally feel that Clojure has enough of nice features.* All that is
left to do is to make the transition easier. Although it may seem less
technical and less interesting to the geeks, it is important to realize that
all coders are not geeks and not everybody behaves rationally. Looks,
presentation and ability to lure people also matters. After all, looks and
ease in *every* way is an integral part of a Programming Language.
Finally, comments like "doing XYZ will encourage them to write sloppy code"
is not good. Nobody likes to write sloppy code. They do it because writing
good code is very hard in the language or the IDE does not support it.
A language need not be very good to be a success. A lot depends on the IDE
support. It is known to everybody that most of the Java code is written in
IDE like Eclipse only. And Eclipse goes a long way in reducing the
boilerplate code, thus reducing a flaw in the Java language. Similarly
Enclojure and Counterclockwise support be just splendid. Just saying "use
Slime/Vimclojure" does not help again.
My 5 cents. it is too long for 2 cents.
Thanks,
Ajay G
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 9:28 PM, Sean Devlin <francoisdev...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Look, Clojure does a lot to make life easier. But if Joe Q. Coder
> isn't willing to *try* to work with parens, he won't have a chance
> picking up Clojure.
>
> It is proudly a Lisp for people that want to get things done. Any
> Java/.NET/Python/Brainfuck/Ruby/Basic/C/C++ (No Perlmongers :)) that
> want to get better are welcome. However, there is a way things are
> done in the language, driven by the underlying problems reality
> imposes on developers. A prospective Clojure developer must accept
> that the language does this to help you, not hurt you, and they need
> to be open to the ideas.
>
> That is the intended audience.
>
> Sean
>
> On Dec 18, 7:59 pm, Martin Coxall <pseudo.m...@me.com> wrote:
> > On 19 Dec 2009, at 00:53, Sean Devlin wrote:
> >
> > > What you're looking for is called "Python".
> >
> > > The parens are your friend. Learn to love them. They are there to
> > > remind you that you're building a data structure, not just writing
> > > code.
> >
> > > Sean
> >
> > As it happens, I agree with you: I learned to stop noticing the parens a
> long time ago, and think that Clojure's rather pragmatic approach to
> parens-reduction (lambda/vector literals) and other syntactic conveniences
> (object invocation syntax, comma whitespace) strikes a good balance.
> >
> > But I'm trying to think of it from the point of view of Joe Q. Coder, who
> will take one look at our beloved elegant, expressive Clojure, see all the
> parens and run screaming.
> >
> > Many people find would Clojure's comparative lack of syntax very
> human-hostile. Who is the intended audience of Clojure? Is it other Lispers?
> Or other Java programmers?
> >
> > Martin
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Clojure" group.
> To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
> Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with
> your first post.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<clojure%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
