As an outcome of this thread, I have decided not to invest in clojure, so I believe the following to be purely feedback, as I have no agenda to push.
- it seems from some's point of view that I was "trolling". Fine, from my point of view though it was akin to "drink the kool aid or gtfo". Sorry, I'm too old and too well-read and too inquisitive to drink the kool aid, so I'll just gtfo. - I'm not sure what you mean by "not up to speed". I had the book about the google closure library for nearly a year now and I'd read it a few times. I'd gotten copies of all the clojure books published and downloaded all the videos put out and read/watched them several times. I'd scoured the web - and this group - for every clojure related reading material I could find, and watched the clojurescript video a couple of times very carefully and read its rationale a few times. - I'm not sure what you mean by "recovering old ground". When I made the post (24th of July) Clojurescript had only been out for a few days, most notably it was 2 days after "Video is now available of Rich Hickey's talk at ClojureNYC yesterday announcing clojurescript" (22nd of July). - I'd understand what you might've meant by the above two points if you guys had no intentions for anyone outside a very small tightknit group of you to use clojurescript, but if you'd intended others besides you to use it too then no, I don't. - I'm also not sure what you mean by "He did not understand the difference between language and platform, and from there was at a loss to understand our decision-making". I believe my original post and thereafter and throughout were clear enough that my concern was not the clojure language itself, but the google closure library as a dependency. - the argument - paraphrasing - "it's just clojure, you code in clojure, the google library is under, and you don't need to look under" is akin to saying "here's a foundation for you to build a skyscraper on, now build your skyscraper, don't look under at what's in the foundation you're building on". Sorry, can't do. - the notion that the leader decides all unquestioned and that no disappointment or unhappiness will be tolerated is too stalinist for my taste. Regards and best wishes. On Jul 31, 3:27 pm, Stuart Halloway <stuart.hallo...@gmail.com> wrote: > (I have take the liberty of changing the subject line, which may be less than > ideal for some people's reading style.) > -- 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
