On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 7:33 PM, Timothy Washington <twash...@gmail.com> wrote: > This is an interesting discussion. Rich Hickey and Steve Yegge recently > weighed in on the Seajure discussion group (and later discussed on HN). > Yegge basically takes Laszlo's position (clojure needs to start saying yes), > while Hickey takes Nick's position.
Looking at Yegge's list of "yes" languages, I wouldn't want to use any of them (I have in the past and did not enjoy them - or at least not for very long). The problem with "yes" languages is that they're "kitchen sink" languages and they end up being a mass of confusing, inconsistent, bloated, random stuff. However, I really don't think that discussion - nor your quoting of Phil's note about patches - has much bearing on Lázló's original point. The typesafe folks, apart from offering consulting, training and mentoring (which Clojure/core already do), are putting together a standard "stack" / platform which is mostly already promoted (and to some extent endorsed) by the core project, with the exception of Akka - and it certainly makes sense for Akka to get rolled in these days. Scala is trying hard to be Java.Next() and that really means it has to present a unified, standard "stack" to the biggest Java community: "The Enterprise". Scala wants corporate approval and wants Joe Java Developer to be comfortable moving to Scala for corporate / enterprise work. I don't think it's realistic to think that Clojure will displace Java in those environments - Scala is quite a big shift for such places, Clojure would be a quantum leap! Clojure is also about four years younger than Scala so I think we have a few years of maturing and shaking out ahead in the area of tools and libraries before we're in the situation Scala is in right now: able to standardize on a recommended / endorsed set of commercially supported tools and libraries. I like Clojure because it's light and agile. I used Scala for a while and it feels like Java, albeit much cleaner and more powerful - and therefore more productive. For the vast majority of what I do / need to do, Clojure is a much better fit than Scala / Java. Another point that has a bearing on this discussion, IMO, is that the Clojure community seems pretty divided between Emacs and non-Emacs in terms of tooling / environment. I don't see that ever being resolved so I don't see how a single, standard, unified Clojure "stack" could appear that would / could really satisfy the "mass market"... -- Sean A Corfield -- (904) 302-SEAN An Architect's View -- http://corfield.org/ World Singles, LLC. -- http://worldsingles.com/ Railo Technologies, Inc. -- http://www.getrailo.com/ "Perfection is the enemy of the good." -- Gustave Flaubert, French realist novelist (1821-1880) -- 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
