I played around with Kawa around the time I joined Sun which was in 1997. So it's at least that old.
Regards, Elias On 5 July 2016 at 15:34, Alessio Stalla <alessiosta...@gmail.com> wrote: > ABCL is older, yes. I can't look up the dates now, but it started as an > embedded interpreter for the J editor surely more than a decade ago, and > even when it became a standalone project I think Clojure was still in > Rich's head at best. That said, ABCL never had even .1% of the community > Clojure has, which is a pity. ABCL is far from perfect, but with a solid > open source community contributing to it, it could do everything Clojure > does. Many of Clojure's core features are just a library away: > > - immutable data structures -> FSet > - concurrency primitives -> LParallel > - STM -> CL-STM (I think) > - ClojureScript -> Parenscript > > etc. The only things that are still missing from ABCL proper are the > ability to generate Java classes from Lisp and an easy to use ahead-of-time > compiler (to produce libraries readily usable from Java and other > languages). The ecosystem is missing more things, like Java IDE plugins and > a Java/Maven savvy build tool (I'm sure ASDF could be hacked to become that > tool). Clojure once didn't have those, too. > > Besides ABCL, there are other Lisps for the JVM, most notably Kawa, a > Scheme which has been existing for many years, it's older than ABCL I think. > > I don't want to start a war either, and I'm sure Clojure benefits from its > clean room design and implementation, but it's sad to see so many wheels > reinvented, so much effort wasted. > > On 4 July 2016 at 23:17, Alexandre Rademaker <aradema...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I though that ABCL is older than Clojure , am I wrong ?! >> >> One big frustration for me was the error handling ! Errors in Clojure are >> exposed as Java errors, we don't have the amazing CL handlers. >> >> Alexandre >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> > On 4 de jul de 2016, at 17:07, Tom Emerson <tremer...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 7:25 PM, David McClain >> > <d...@refined-audiometrics.com> wrote: >> >> My impressions from a few years ago was that Clojure was another >> language >> >> built for the heck of it, much like Python. Not particularly well >> designed[...] >> > >> > Rich Hickey didn't create Clojure just for the heck of it: he had very >> > specific goals in mind and, IMHO, put a lot of thought into the design >> > of the language and the decisions he made given the design space >> > (running within the overall JVM environment) and the warts he saw in >> > other languages, within and without the Lisp family. There are >> > numerous presentations available online where Rich talks about the >> > development of Clojure: if you're interested I think they would show >> > you that his design >> > >> >> under the control of one individual[...] >> > >> > I'm not sure you can compare Python's BDfL with Rich's position with >> > Clojure. I don't have a concrete example, but Clojure feels less >> > bound-up in its creator's blinders than Python. That can also be a >> > side-effect of its Lisp-nature though. >> > >> >> with lots of cheerleading from the small audience. >> > >> > Which isn't a bad thing. Any new language requires its evangelization. >> > I would also posit that from outside the community, Common Lisp is >> > viewed the same way. >> > >> > [...] >> >> And I know >> >> essentially nothing of the Java world, and whether or not it is a good >> thing >> >> that they are migrating to Clojure. >> > >> > That's the crux of it: if you have to co-exist in a Java universe and >> > want to write in a Lisp, your options are Clojure or Armed Bear Common >> > Lisp. ABCL is relatively recent and does not have the community >> > support that Clojure does. The tooling available for Clojure is quite >> > good, insofar as its Emacs tools are excellent and support for the two >> > most common Java IDEs (Eclipse and IntelliJ) is steadily improving, >> > making the transition for Java developers much more friendly. The >> > software that I'm writing in Clojure is seen by our operations team as >> > "just another Java binary". It allows my software to integrate into >> > their existing monitoring and logging systems without them doing >> > anything different. I also have the entire Java/Scala library >> > ecosystem available to me: if I need something that doesn't exist in >> > Clojure I can usually find it in the Java world. The interop between >> > Clojure and Java is cleaner, in my limited experience, than that >> > between ABCL and Java. >> > >> > While its a tired trope, cross-platform compatibility is good. I >> > develop on Mac OS X, continuous integration and deployment on Linux, >> > and my coworkers use generally use Windows. That's not uniquely a >> > Clojure feature: SBCL, CCL, and LW all run on these different >> > environments too. >> > >> > There are parts of Common Lisp I miss when developing in Clojure, >> > especially the conditions system. I sometimes miss CLOS, but Clojure >> > has multimethod dispatch which is good enough for most cases. >> > >> > I like both Clojure and Common Lisp, and see them as complementary >> > tools which I select depending on my needs at any given time. However, >> > there is a cognitive load in switching between them, and since most of >> > my work of late is in a Java world, I tend to stick with Clojure even >> > for nonce tools. >> > >> > ClojureScript is amazing if you are creating tools or services that >> > need a web-based UI, whether for primary interaction or diagnostics. >> > The entire system can be written in Clojure, with the UI running on >> > the client browser. You can share code across projects: I have a set >> > of functions used to generate various sequence comparison statistics >> > that I share between command-line tools and a single-page web >> > application that is written in ClojureScript. Before moving to >> > ClojureScript I had to maintain two versions of these, one in >> > JavaScript and another in Clojure. I can even make these functions >> > callable from Java, if I cared to do so. >> > >> > Anyway, I don't want to initiate a religious war between Clojure and >> > CL. I just wanted to give you some reasons why a (Common) Lisper may >> > also use and enjoy Clojure. >> > >> > Peace, >> > >> > -tree >> > >> > -- >> > Tom Emerson >> > tremer...@gmail.com >> > http://it-is-what-it-is.treerex.net >> > >> >> >