No, it isn't. And never has this author proven that programmers with bipolar personality are programming more LISP then other languages.
Many larger libraries in the Clojure community are well documented and "finished-off properly". Web frameworks have been tried and not been picked up. Users have chosen the modular compose it yourself approach. Framework authors have simply stopped maintaining what nobody wanted anyway or split them up into smaller pieces. On Sunday, May 3, 2015 at 8:25:22 PM UTC+2, larry google groups wrote: > > > > The web development industry as reflected in job postings at > > Indeed.co.uk is still dominated by the likes of Rails, Django, Laravel, > > Zend, Symfony & Spring so I'm not sure how you've concluded that there's > > been a 15-year trend towards composition. > > That is a good point, though I would also point out that, according to > Indeed.com, the use of Clojure is also growing. To me, what's important is > the growth of the Clojure community, rather than the growth of some > sub-community focused on a particular niche. > > However, I acknowledge you may have a point about the failure of any of > the Clojure frameworks to take off. It's possible this is another > manifestation of the Bipolar Programmer problem: > > http://www.lambdassociates.org/blog/bipolar.htm > > "Brilliance and failure are so often mixed together and our initial > reaction is it shouldn't be. But it happens and it happens a lot. Why? > ...But brilliance is not enough. You need application too, because the > material is harder at university. So pretty soon our man is getting B+, > then Bs and then Cs for his assignments. He experiences alternating > feelings of failure cutting through his usual self assurance. He can still > stay up to 5.00AM and hand in his assignment before the 9.00AM deadline, > but what he hands in is not so great. > > ...So BBMs love Lisp. And the stunning originality of Lisp is reflective > of the creativity of the BBM; so we have a long list of ideas that > originated with Lispers - garbage collection, list handling, personal > computing, windowing and areas in which Lisp people were amongst the > earliest pioneers. So we would think, off the cuff, that Lisp should be > well established, the premiere programming language because hey - its great > and we were the first guys to do this stuff. > > But it isn't and the reasons why not are not in the language, but in the > community itself, which contains not just the strengths but also the > weaknesses of the BBM. > > One of these is the inability to finish things off properly. The phrase > 'throw-away design' is absolutely made for the BBM and it comes from the > Lisp community. Lisp allows you to just chuck things off so easily, and > it is easy to take this for granted. I saw this 10 years ago when looking > for a GUI to my Lisp (Garnet had just gone West then). No problem, there > were 9 different offerings. The trouble was that none of the 9 were > properly documented and none were bug free. Basically each person had > implemented his own solution and it worked for him so that was fine. This > is a BBM attitude; it works for me and I understand it. It is also the > product of not needing or wanting anybody else's help to do something." > > > > > > On Sunday, May 3, 2015 at 9:51:15 AM UTC-4, g vim wrote: >> >> On 03/05/2015 14:39, larry google groups wrote: >> > The industry has been moving against frameworks for 15 years now. The >> > peak of the monolithic framework craze was Struts, back in 2000. After >> > that, people started craving something less bloated. That's why the >> > whole industry was so excited when Rails emerged in 2004. Bruce Eckel >> > summed up the sudden change of mood in his essay "The departure of the >> > hyper-enthusiasts": >> > >> > http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=141312 >> > >> > But after awhile, people began to feel that even Rails was bloated, >> > which lead to the emergence of micro-frameworks like Sinatra. >> > >> > And then, continuing with the trend, we've seen the emergence of >> > eco-systems, such as Clojure, that allow the trend to go further: >> > Clojure supports such high levels composition that frameworks are no >> > longer needed. And this is the direction the industry has been moving >> > for the last 15 years. Clojure is simply out in front. Most languages >> > don't allow this level of composition. >> > >> >> The web development industry as reflected in job postings at >> Indeed.co.uk is still dominated by the likes of Rails, Django, Laravel, >> Zend, Symfony & Spring so I'm not sure how you've concluded that there's >> been a 15-year trend towards composition. Ruby and Python have had >> lightweight composable alternatives for many years but Rails and Django >> still dominate. I'm not against the composition at all. I just think we >> need more structured alternatives that we can at least brand and market >> as well as teach to Clojure beginners. >> >> gvim >> > -- 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/d/optout.
