+1 here. I'm afraid the only solution I've found is to stop writing Ruby. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 2:39 PM, Mark <markaddle...@gmail.com> wrote: > I misread the critical piece of your post :) You are, indeed, a step ahead > of me > > > On Tuesday, January 14, 2014 11:30:13 AM UTC-8, g vim wrote: >> >> It's been the other way round for me. I always felt Ruby was doing too >> much under the hood. So much so that I bought "Ruby Under A Microscope" >> just to find out what was going on. I found it very easy to switch to >> Clojure because everything is so much more transparent. Now Ruby just >> feels awkward though I still need to use it due to its mindshare in the >> web development domain. >> >> gvim >> >> >> On 14/01/2014 19:18, Mark wrote: >> > I have felt your pain. I started life with Smalltalk and more or less >> > spent the last 15 years in Java. When I started Clojure, it was very >> > hard to break my thinking habits. Particularly, I was lost without >> > manifest typing. I didn't realize how much types documented my system >> > and allowed very lazy thinking on my part. I had less trouble with >> > immutability as I had developed the habit of coding immutable objects in >> > Java. >> > >> > I started dabbling in Clojure about a year ago and started coding a >> > serious project about 3 months ago. Only recently have I gotten used to >> > thinking about mapping functions over data as opposed to looping through >> > a collection although I still find myself coding loop/recur and then >> > realizing I could use map. I've also developed very different work >> > habits due to the REPL. >> > >> > In my own case, the particular changes in my thinking that have really >> > aided me are: >> > >> > 1. Being able to visualize the data structure that a function is >> > operating on >> > 2. I find that my code falls into two categories: computing new data >> > or transforming data structures >> > 3. Never try to compute new data and transform data at the same time >> > 4. Much of the time computing new data is either map or reduce. >> > Understanding these two (especially the flexibility of reduce) is >> > huge >> > 5. 80% of the time that I want to transform data, postwalk is the >> > answer >> > >> > I'm sure that as I get to know the Clojure libraries better, the >> > specifics around #4 and #5 will change but I bet the first three are >> > pretty constant. >> > > > -- > -- > 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 > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Clojure" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- -- 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 --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
