I would like to echo the sentiment expressed by several posters in this 
thread, but with a slight twist. A few years back I picked up Ruby and Ruby 
on Rails as the language/framework to create a website with moderate 
complexity and functionality. I did this without any prior experience with 
the language of framework. What allowed me to quickly pick up both was the 
excellent documentation around the language and framework. For example, 
with the information from http://guides.rubyonrails.org and the canonical 
application built in https://www.railstutorial.org one can acquire the 
necessary knowledge to develop highly functional websites. Branching out to 
leverage "non-canonical" libraries/products then becomes a fairly easy 
exercise (MongoDB instead of MySQL, Mongoid instead of ActiveRecords, 
etc.). What allows that to happen is the momentum built around the Rails 
ecosystem via community participation and documentation. 

We have recently started to build our "back end" infrastructure in Clojure. 
Many times we have discussed the value and desire to unify our development 
efforts on and around Clojure. Inevitably we tally up all the functionality 
inherited from Ruby gems (that play nice with Rails - the Framework) that 
would have to be replicated in Clojure and there always shortcomings, not 
necessarily in the availability of libraries that perform these functions, 
but in the readily accessible documentation about how to best integrate 
them. 

The "composable libraries over framework" mantra is technically solid. What 
we're missing, in the "web development with Clojure" subset of the 
community, is the stewardship to create and maintain a canonical 
amalgamation of composable libraries and the best practices around them - a 
la https://railstutorial.org. This would lower the barrier of entry into 
the web development realm for Clojure developers. My 2+ cents.

On Saturday, May 2, 2015 at 4:43:53 PM UTC-4, g vim wrote:
>
> I recently did some research into web frameworks on Github. Here's what 
> I found: 
>
>
> FRAMEWORK       LANG          CONTRIBUTORS         COMMITS 
>
> Luminus        Clojure            28        678 
> Caribou        Clojure             2        275 
>
> Beego        Golang            99        1522 
>
> Phoenix        Elixir              124        1949 
>
> Yesod        Haskell           130        3722 
>
> Laravel        PHP                268        4421 
>
> Play                Scala               417        6085 
>
> Symfony        PHP                1130        20914 
>
> Rails        Ruby               2691        51000 
>
>
> One could conclude from this that the Clojure community isn't that 
> interested in web development but the last Clojure survey suggests 
> otherwise. Clojure's library composition approach to everything only 
> goes so far with large web applications, as Aaron Bedra reminded us in 
> March last year: www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBL59w7fXw4 . Less manpower 
> means less momentum and more bugs. Furthermore, I have a hunch that 
> Clojure's poor adoption as indicated by Indeed.com maybe due to this 
> immaturity in the web framework sphere. Why is it that Elixir, with a 
> much smaller community and lifespan than Clojure's, has managed to put 4 
> times as much mindshare into its main web framework when its module 
> output, as measured by modulecounts.com, is a tiny fraction of Clojure's? 
>
> 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.

Reply via email to