Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
Hi, Random thought from a very tired person. :) Programmers manipulate tiny pieces of reality, so tiny that quantum effects come into play. [1] Many of us (unknowingly) train our visual senses to help us calculate these strange manipulations with less strain. Maybe if we train it on too narrow a range of notations, it's harder to extend this training to slightly perturbed ones. [2] Lisp + Paredit helps me train kinesthetic parts too. The effects are maybe too submerged for me to introspect [3], but Lisp is oddly close to things my hands manipulate in normal life. I commonly hold groups of things. Those things may be delimited by enclosing objects; between them may lie empty-looking space. (Of course, in daily life I'm not causing things to suddenly blink out of existence or be enclosed. But my body seems to adjust to the concept fine.) Lisp representation may just be symbolic, but manipulating it isn't only like text editing. It lends itself to structure editing. [4] BTW, this post isn't about Lisp is better than language X. If someone like likes X better than Lisp, then cheers. All the best, Tj [1] http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/11567/is-quantum-physics-used-in-manufacturing-cpus [2] Given that Lisp syntax isn't merely aesthetic, but radically simplifies some things, it should often be worth the retraining. BTW, programming languages are artificial sorts of languages. Humans have enormous difficulty with them compared to natural language; if anyone claims that C-like languages are easier for humans to compute than Lisp, ask for scientific studies. Or simply email Chomsky and ask him. [3] It's likely good that we have limits to introspection, because otherwise we probably couldn't function as well. I suppose this is when people start using mystical terms like intuition. [4] I vaguely hear manipulating Java under Eclipse may be more advanced than Paredit, due to greater engineering effort. But this shouldn't affect the analysis. On Saturday, August 17, 2013 12:47:09 AM UTC+2, frye wrote: Oh thanks Steven. I've lately been thinking about human cognition, intelligence, etc. So boning up on my Chomsky, Kurzweil, and so on. Remember that the original lisp syntax only had a few core features: homoiconicity, first-class functions, recursion, garbage collection, etc. But from this core, the most advance language features have been easily added. Indeed, we're seeing this in real time, in Clojure: immutable data, lazy sequences, concurrent programming with STM, etc. Now, while theoretically possible, I don't think it's really feasible to implement many of these features in Cobol or Pascal - languages from the same era. Even Java has made a very clumsy attempt at closures, etc. But these other languages can't compete with the LISP approach, I think because of their syntax design. The human species still has an extremely limited understanding of how consciousness (ie cognition) works. My suspicion though, is that aspect's like the simplicity of lisp's syntax is what keeps it at the bleeding edge of computer science and our notions of computation. As limited as that is. Tim Washington Interruptsoftware.ca / Bkeeping.com On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Steven Degutis sbde...@gmail.comjavascript: wrote: Great point Tim. When I first realized that most problems and solutions are language-agnostic, I started downplaying the importance of syntax. But now I think they're like apples and oranges. Sure, semantics and syntax live together, but one's not more important than the other. They're both important to get right, for different reasons. For instance, while function calls in Ruby are (typically) semantically similar to in Clojure, destructuring arguments in Ruby is much more limited than in Clojure, and in Clojure it's much more easily readable as well as more powerful. This is only a syntax thing though, but it's a powerful player in the feature-set. On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 12:27 PM, Timothy Washington twas...@gmail.comjavascript: wrote: I think it's a mistake to discount the importance of syntax to a language. Human beings, as a species is heavily symbolic. Think of ancient cave paintings, to pictograms, to scripts. We use these symbols to communicate with each other, our outside world, and our abstract thoughts. Whether it's written / spoken language, or math or music notation, we need these symbols - it's a human thing. Dolphins or monkeys, while very intelligent, do not, by themselves, use these written symbols to communicate with each other. And I think it follows then, that the design of the syntax itself is important. It's certainly true that abstract concepts (of computation in this case) are the motive for using any given syntax. But the syntax impacts and facilitates the kinds of ideas we can have, the ease with which we can communicate them with each other,
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
I think it's a mistake to discount the importance of syntax to a language. Human beings, as a species is heavily symbolic. Think of ancient cave paintings, to pictograms, to scripts. We use these symbols to communicate with each other, our outside world, and our abstract thoughts. Whether it's written / spoken language, or math or music notation, we need these symbols - it's a human thing. Dolphins or monkeys, while very intelligent, do not, by themselves, use these written symbols to communicate with each other. And I think it follows then, that the design of the syntax itself is important. It's certainly true that abstract concepts (of computation in this case) are the motive for using any given syntax. But the syntax impacts and facilitates the kinds of ideas we can have, the ease with which we can communicate them with each other, and so on. Anyways, my two cents. Tim Washington Interruptsoftware.ca / Bkeeping.com -- -- 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.
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
Great point Tim. When I first realized that most problems and solutions are language-agnostic, I started downplaying the importance of syntax. But now I think they're like apples and oranges. Sure, semantics and syntax live together, but one's not more important than the other. They're both important to get right, for different reasons. For instance, while function calls in Ruby are (typically) semantically similar to in Clojure, destructuring arguments in Ruby is much more limited than in Clojure, and in Clojure it's much more easily readable as well as more powerful. This is only a syntax thing though, but it's a powerful player in the feature-set. On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 12:27 PM, Timothy Washington twash...@gmail.comwrote: I think it's a mistake to discount the importance of syntax to a language. Human beings, as a species is heavily symbolic. Think of ancient cave paintings, to pictograms, to scripts. We use these symbols to communicate with each other, our outside world, and our abstract thoughts. Whether it's written / spoken language, or math or music notation, we need these symbols - it's a human thing. Dolphins or monkeys, while very intelligent, do not, by themselves, use these written symbols to communicate with each other. And I think it follows then, that the design of the syntax itself is important. It's certainly true that abstract concepts (of computation in this case) are the motive for using any given syntax. But the syntax impacts and facilitates the kinds of ideas we can have, the ease with which we can communicate them with each other, and so on. Anyways, my two cents. Tim Washington Interruptsoftware.ca / Bkeeping.com -- -- 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.
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
Oh thanks Steven. I've lately been thinking about human cognition, intelligence, etc. So boning up on my Chomsky, Kurzweil, and so on. Remember that the original lisp syntax only had a few core features: homoiconicity, first-class functions, recursion, garbage collection, etc. But from this core, the most advance language features have been easily added. Indeed, we're seeing this in real time, in Clojure: immutable data, lazy sequences, concurrent programming with STM, etc. Now, while theoretically possible, I don't think it's really feasible to implement many of these features in Cobol or Pascal - languages from the same era. Even Java has made a very clumsy attempt at closures, etc. But these other languages can't compete with the LISP approach, I think because of their syntax design. The human species still has an extremely limited understanding of how consciousness (ie cognition) works. My suspicion though, is that aspect's like the simplicity of lisp's syntax is what keeps it at the bleeding edge of computer science and our notions of computation. As limited as that is. Tim Washington Interruptsoftware.ca / Bkeeping.com On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Steven Degutis sbdegu...@gmail.com wrote: Great point Tim. When I first realized that most problems and solutions are language-agnostic, I started downplaying the importance of syntax. But now I think they're like apples and oranges. Sure, semantics and syntax live together, but one's not more important than the other. They're both important to get right, for different reasons. For instance, while function calls in Ruby are (typically) semantically similar to in Clojure, destructuring arguments in Ruby is much more limited than in Clojure, and in Clojure it's much more easily readable as well as more powerful. This is only a syntax thing though, but it's a powerful player in the feature-set. On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 12:27 PM, Timothy Washington twash...@gmail.comwrote: I think it's a mistake to discount the importance of syntax to a language. Human beings, as a species is heavily symbolic. Think of ancient cave paintings, to pictograms, to scripts. We use these symbols to communicate with each other, our outside world, and our abstract thoughts. Whether it's written / spoken language, or math or music notation, we need these symbols - it's a human thing. Dolphins or monkeys, while very intelligent, do not, by themselves, use these written symbols to communicate with each other. And I think it follows then, that the design of the syntax itself is important. It's certainly true that abstract concepts (of computation in this case) are the motive for using any given syntax. But the syntax impacts and facilitates the kinds of ideas we can have, the ease with which we can communicate them with each other, and so on. Anyways, my two cents. -- -- 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.
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
marți, 13 august 2013, 23:13:39 UTC+3, Russell Whitaker a scris: Speaking of the purpose of the poll, what is it? What purpose does an off-list poll serve that an on-list answer doesn't? I'm curious: is this for a school assignment or for an employer or...? R Statistics. I want to know how many Clojure users actually like the syntax and find it beautiful, and how many just go along with it, with it's good and bad. No school or employer assignment. I am surprised and happy that so many have expressed their opinion on this thread. Thanks. -- -- 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.
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
Răzvan Rotaru razvan.rot...@gmail.com writes: Statistics. I want to know how many Clojure users actually like the syntax and find it beautiful, and how many just go along with it, with it's good and bad. No school or employer assignment. I am surprised and happy that so many have expressed their opinion on this thread. Thanks. You shouldn't be. Syntax is one of the holy wars amoung programmers. Which operating system, which IDE, typed vs untyped, and of course, the all time classic 2, 4 or 8 space indentation. Phil -- -- 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.
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
Two obviously. It's the only compromise between those who want everything to be a prime number, and those who want everything to be a power of two. On 14 August 2013 18:48, Phillip Lord phillip.l...@newcastle.ac.uk wrote: Răzvan Rotaru razvan.rot...@gmail.com writes: Statistics. I want to know how many Clojure users actually like the syntax and find it beautiful, and how many just go along with it, with it's good and bad. No school or employer assignment. I am surprised and happy that so many have expressed their opinion on this thread. Thanks. You shouldn't be. Syntax is one of the holy wars amoung programmers. Which operating system, which IDE, typed vs untyped, and of course, the all time classic 2, 4 or 8 space indentation. Phil -- -- 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.
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
And if you're a JavaScript developer with an extreme mind, you minimize your code to have no space. Le 14 août 2013 18:12, Dan Cross cro...@gmail.com a écrit : On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Chris Ford christophertf...@gmail.comwrote: Two obviously. It's the only compromise between those who want everything to be a prime number, and those who want everything to be a power of two. I used to sometimes use 3 spaces, just to be a contrarian. Then I learned the error of my ways. The real answer is, of course, 1 space: it's a factor of everything. On 14 August 2013 18:48, Phillip Lord phillip.l...@newcastle.ac.ukwrote: Răzvan Rotaru razvan.rot...@gmail.com writes: Statistics. I want to know how many Clojure users actually like the syntax and find it beautiful, and how many just go along with it, with it's good and bad. No school or employer assignment. I am surprised and happy that so many have expressed their opinion on this thread. Thanks. You shouldn't be. Syntax is one of the holy wars amoung programmers. Which operating system, which IDE, typed vs untyped, and of course, the all time classic 2, 4 or 8 space indentation. Phil -- -- 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. -- -- 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.
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Chris Ford christophertf...@gmail.comwrote: Two obviously. It's the only compromise between those who want everything to be a prime number, and those who want everything to be a power of two. I used to sometimes use 3 spaces, just to be a contrarian. Then I learned the error of my ways. The real answer is, of course, 1 space: it's a factor of everything. On 14 August 2013 18:48, Phillip Lord phillip.l...@newcastle.ac.ukwrote: Răzvan Rotaru razvan.rot...@gmail.com writes: Statistics. I want to know how many Clojure users actually like the syntax and find it beautiful, and how many just go along with it, with it's good and bad. No school or employer assignment. I am surprised and happy that so many have expressed their opinion on this thread. Thanks. You shouldn't be. Syntax is one of the holy wars amoung programmers. Which operating system, which IDE, typed vs untyped, and of course, the all time classic 2, 4 or 8 space indentation. Phil -- -- 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. -- -- 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.
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
Ahhh, the good old Lisp syntax debate! I learned Clojure back in 2008, and it was my first Lisp (and is still the only Lisp I'm comfortable with). I've had lots of Java experience, and a fair amount of Ruby experience over the years... With occasional bits and pieces in other languages like Erlang, Prolog, Python etc... and more recently I've been learning Haskell on and off. Syntax is pretty much the least important thing about a programming language (it's all about the semantics), but of all these syntaxes Clojure's is definitely the one I love the most. It's simple, logical, unambiguous, consistent and very user friendly when it comes to moving chunks of code around in a good editor (e.g. Emacs + paredit). Subjectively I found Erlang's syntax pretty horrible (though I like the language itself), Ruby's is superficially beautiful but in practice ambiguous and not without its warts... I don't know Scala but whenever I read introductions to the language the amount of syntax terrifies me... I accept that this is an irrational reaction; similar to what many people get about s-expressions... I just find it interesting that it goes both ways. I'm no where near proficient in Haskell (very much still learning), but it's syntax is pretty confusing in parts... though it has bits that I really like. R. On 12 August 2013 08:52, Răzvan Rotaru razvan.rot...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I'm curious about the general opinion on the Clojure syntax, whether people actually like it or just use it because it provides macros. So I would like to ask you to participate in a poll. Thank You. Here's the link: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1GSgfkeThpUYlgFVzhhNIgA1JbTilu6S9eudq_Sbxl34/viewform Răzvan -- -- 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.
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
On Wednesday, August 14, 2013 10:14:24 AM UTC-7, Rick Moynihan wrote: Subjectively I found Erlang's syntax pretty horrible (though I like the language itself), Ruby's is superficially beautiful but in practice ambiguous and not without its warts... Have you had a chance to check out Elixir (http://elixir-lang.org/)? It's a language with Ruby-inspired syntax (plus goodies like Clojure-style protocols and true macros) running on the Erlang VM. -- -- 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.
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
To me you cannot separate Clojure's syntax from its capabilities, because a number of its capabilities are enabled by the syntax. On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 10:55 PM, Christian Sperandio christian.speran...@gmail.com wrote: I think the choice of a language has always a subjective part. Particularly when you learn a language by yourself for pleasure. Because it's 'for pleasure' you want to learn a fun stuff. At work, I believe the subjective part works against a choice. Currently, at my office, the 8 other colleagues don't want to take a look at Clojure because of its LISP syntax. Their brain blocks and they don't hear you when you talk about the language capabilities. Le 13 août 2013 03:14, Devin Walters dev...@gmail.com a écrit : I have to echo previous sentiments. I'm not going to fill out the survey because as it currently stands, it seems like it's begging for a conclusion that satisfies the author. I'd like to see more targeted questions w/r/t syntax. But there again, I think this kind of question is highly subjective, and likely to provide a narrow view of what people *actually* care about in Clojure: writing great programs, being inspired to dig deeper, realizing creative potential, etc. '(Devin Walters) On Aug 12, 2013, at 7:21 PM, Ramesh ramesh10dul...@gmail.com wrote: Great points here! I think once someone is comfortable with Clojure, Scala will be more disgusting than Java. This is because, Scala has such great adornments, ironically aspiring toward simplification. -ramesh On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 7:58 AM, David Pollak feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com wrote: A couple of quick reactions... The survey itself is too flat. It's like asking do you like red or green? Well... I like green on my walls, but I like red on my ties. Scala has macros and a much richer syntax (although doing anything like core.async with Scala macros might be like putting tabsco on an open cut... just sayin') so I don't think the syntax and the macro stuff is a one-to-one mapping. People learn to work with a variety of syntaxes and are successful with them. Java and C++ have viscously awful syntax, yet they are very popular and most users of the languages don't notice. Both C and Lisp model an abstract computer and have syntax that reflects the computer that they model and to my mind, that helps the user of each language grok the abstract computer they are programming. I'd like a two-way mapping between a Clojure and an Excel-like formula language. That way people could write one-liner Clojure functions in a syntax that non-programmers are already comfortable with. I'm noodling with something like that right now. I think Jay and Colin are saying something very, very important: Clojure feels uncomfortable until it feels very comfortable and then there's no going back. I am not yet comfortable with Clojure's syntax, but I totally appreciate it. But I'm doing work in Scala, Java, and Clojure all for pay all in the same week every week... and bouncing among all three makes getting comfortable with Clojure a little slow. Further, I fear (deeply... in my bones) that once I am comfortable with Clojure, doing Scala will be as disgusting as doing Java is after 7 years of Scala. :-( On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 12:52 AM, Răzvan Rotaru razvan.rot...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I'm curious about the general opinion on the Clojure syntax, whether people actually like it or just use it because it provides macros. So I would like to ask you to participate in a poll. Thank You. Here's the link: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1GSgfkeThpUYlgFVzhhNIgA1JbTilu6S9eudq_Sbxl34/viewform Răzvan -- -- 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. -- Telegram, Simply Beautiful CMS https://telegr.am Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp Blog: http://goodstuff.im -- -- 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
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
Even if I think the current syntax is one of the best, could you say what Clojure's capability couldn't be done with another syntax? Other languages implement FP without lisp syntax and the macros could be done in another way, perhaps with AST (like in groovy). Le 13 août 2013 08:53, Alex Baranosky alexander.barano...@gmail.com a écrit : To me you cannot separate Clojure's syntax from its capabilities, because a number of its capabilities are enabled by the syntax. On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 10:55 PM, Christian Sperandio christian.speran...@gmail.com wrote: I think the choice of a language has always a subjective part. Particularly when you learn a language by yourself for pleasure. Because it's 'for pleasure' you want to learn a fun stuff. At work, I believe the subjective part works against a choice. Currently, at my office, the 8 other colleagues don't want to take a look at Clojure because of its LISP syntax. Their brain blocks and they don't hear you when you talk about the language capabilities. Le 13 août 2013 03:14, Devin Walters dev...@gmail.com a écrit : I have to echo previous sentiments. I'm not going to fill out the survey because as it currently stands, it seems like it's begging for a conclusion that satisfies the author. I'd like to see more targeted questions w/r/t syntax. But there again, I think this kind of question is highly subjective, and likely to provide a narrow view of what people *actually* care about in Clojure: writing great programs, being inspired to dig deeper, realizing creative potential, etc. '(Devin Walters) On Aug 12, 2013, at 7:21 PM, Ramesh ramesh10dul...@gmail.com wrote: Great points here! I think once someone is comfortable with Clojure, Scala will be more disgusting than Java. This is because, Scala has such great adornments, ironically aspiring toward simplification. -ramesh On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 7:58 AM, David Pollak feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com wrote: A couple of quick reactions... The survey itself is too flat. It's like asking do you like red or green? Well... I like green on my walls, but I like red on my ties. Scala has macros and a much richer syntax (although doing anything like core.async with Scala macros might be like putting tabsco on an open cut... just sayin') so I don't think the syntax and the macro stuff is a one-to-one mapping. People learn to work with a variety of syntaxes and are successful with them. Java and C++ have viscously awful syntax, yet they are very popular and most users of the languages don't notice. Both C and Lisp model an abstract computer and have syntax that reflects the computer that they model and to my mind, that helps the user of each language grok the abstract computer they are programming. I'd like a two-way mapping between a Clojure and an Excel-like formula language. That way people could write one-liner Clojure functions in a syntax that non-programmers are already comfortable with. I'm noodling with something like that right now. I think Jay and Colin are saying something very, very important: Clojure feels uncomfortable until it feels very comfortable and then there's no going back. I am not yet comfortable with Clojure's syntax, but I totally appreciate it. But I'm doing work in Scala, Java, and Clojure all for pay all in the same week every week... and bouncing among all three makes getting comfortable with Clojure a little slow. Further, I fear (deeply... in my bones) that once I am comfortable with Clojure, doing Scala will be as disgusting as doing Java is after 7 years of Scala. :-( On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 12:52 AM, Răzvan Rotaru razvan.rot...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I'm curious about the general opinion on the Clojure syntax, whether people actually like it or just use it because it provides macros. So I would like to ask you to participate in a poll. Thank You. Here's the link: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1GSgfkeThpUYlgFVzhhNIgA1JbTilu6S9eudq_Sbxl34/viewform Răzvan -- -- 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. -- Telegram, Simply Beautiful CMS https://telegr.am Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp Blog: http://goodstuff.im -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
IMO, macros without homoiconicity are unnecessarily complex: so in that sense Clojure's syntax makes macros simpler. Where macros are simply reorganizing some data in Clojure, in a language like Groovy you've got to jump through hoops and only get a limited slice of the power. Homoiconicity gives other little benefits as well, because it means you can use the same code on the code as you could use on the data, which has unforseen benefits. For example I can diff source code, or list outputs using the same function ( https://github.com/AlexBaranosky/gui-diff/blob/master/src/gui/diff.clj#L30). Also, you can very conveniently print data to a string and spit to a file, then slurp it back out. These things just make life easier in Clojure, and are directly related to its syntax. Alex On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 12:23 AM, Christian Sperandio christian.speran...@gmail.com wrote: Even if I think the current syntax is one of the best, could you say what Clojure's capability couldn't be done with another syntax? Other languages implement FP without lisp syntax and the macros could be done in another way, perhaps with AST (like in groovy). Le 13 août 2013 08:53, Alex Baranosky alexander.barano...@gmail.com a écrit : To me you cannot separate Clojure's syntax from its capabilities, because a number of its capabilities are enabled by the syntax. On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 10:55 PM, Christian Sperandio christian.speran...@gmail.com wrote: I think the choice of a language has always a subjective part. Particularly when you learn a language by yourself for pleasure. Because it's 'for pleasure' you want to learn a fun stuff. At work, I believe the subjective part works against a choice. Currently, at my office, the 8 other colleagues don't want to take a look at Clojure because of its LISP syntax. Their brain blocks and they don't hear you when you talk about the language capabilities. Le 13 août 2013 03:14, Devin Walters dev...@gmail.com a écrit : I have to echo previous sentiments. I'm not going to fill out the survey because as it currently stands, it seems like it's begging for a conclusion that satisfies the author. I'd like to see more targeted questions w/r/t syntax. But there again, I think this kind of question is highly subjective, and likely to provide a narrow view of what people *actually* care about in Clojure: writing great programs, being inspired to dig deeper, realizing creative potential, etc. '(Devin Walters) On Aug 12, 2013, at 7:21 PM, Ramesh ramesh10dul...@gmail.com wrote: Great points here! I think once someone is comfortable with Clojure, Scala will be more disgusting than Java. This is because, Scala has such great adornments, ironically aspiring toward simplification. -ramesh On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 7:58 AM, David Pollak feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com wrote: A couple of quick reactions... The survey itself is too flat. It's like asking do you like red or green? Well... I like green on my walls, but I like red on my ties. Scala has macros and a much richer syntax (although doing anything like core.async with Scala macros might be like putting tabsco on an open cut... just sayin') so I don't think the syntax and the macro stuff is a one-to-one mapping. People learn to work with a variety of syntaxes and are successful with them. Java and C++ have viscously awful syntax, yet they are very popular and most users of the languages don't notice. Both C and Lisp model an abstract computer and have syntax that reflects the computer that they model and to my mind, that helps the user of each language grok the abstract computer they are programming. I'd like a two-way mapping between a Clojure and an Excel-like formula language. That way people could write one-liner Clojure functions in a syntax that non-programmers are already comfortable with. I'm noodling with something like that right now. I think Jay and Colin are saying something very, very important: Clojure feels uncomfortable until it feels very comfortable and then there's no going back. I am not yet comfortable with Clojure's syntax, but I totally appreciate it. But I'm doing work in Scala, Java, and Clojure all for pay all in the same week every week... and bouncing among all three makes getting comfortable with Clojure a little slow. Further, I fear (deeply... in my bones) that once I am comfortable with Clojure, doing Scala will be as disgusting as doing Java is after 7 years of Scala. :-( On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 12:52 AM, Răzvan Rotaru razvan.rot...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I'm curious about the general opinion on the Clojure syntax, whether people actually like it or just use it because it provides macros. So I would like to ask you to participate in a poll. Thank You. Here's the link: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1GSgfkeThpUYlgFVzhhNIgA1JbTilu6S9eudq_Sbxl34/viewform Răzvan -- -- You received this message because you are
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
2013/8/13 Christian Sperandio christian.speran...@gmail.com Even if I think the current syntax is one of the best, could you say what Clojure's capability couldn't be done with another syntax? They could, Elixir is a good recent example. However, it's a very tricky thing to get right, while s-expressions have been around for over 50 years (literally) and known to work. Other languages implement FP without lisp syntax and the macros could be done in another way, perhaps with AST (like in groovy). That's not another way, that's largely the same way, just requiring a lot of extra work from language developers. -- MK http://github.com/michaelklishin http://twitter.com/michaelklishin -- -- 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.
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
I think it depends on what is important to you. For me, the syntax is core to the language because it encourages a certain mindset. The default for everything is (verb noun noun noun...) - this is the kingdom of verbs, and functions are how you build things. If you added an infix syntax, or some other way to get rid of the nested nature of lisp*, you'd take away that focus on functions, and what you'd have left wouldn't be clojure. I'm sure you could write a fine language related to clojure, with a human-friendly syntax and a lower learning curve**. I'm still a big fan of the ruby syntax myself, despite a few idiosyncrasies. But I'd find it much harder to write FP-style in ruby - it doesn't look right, and you don't tend to focus on the verbs, you focus on the nouns. YMMV of course; this sort of thing can be pretty subjective. - Korny * of course if you stay nested but fix the syntax using something like indentation or other magic, then I might be happier, though none of the ways people have done this so far particularly appealed to me. ** anecdote time - we had a junior programmer join our team, and in her words it takes 3 weeks to learn to appreciate clojure - so the learning curve isn't *that* bad! The syntax is a bit of a barrier, but the _simplicity_ of the syntax helps a lot, once you are over the initial reaction. On 13 Aug 2013 17:23, Christian Sperandio christian.speran...@gmail.com wrote: Even if I think the current syntax is one of the best, could you say what Clojure's capability couldn't be done with another syntax? Other languages implement FP without lisp syntax and the macros could be done in another way, perhaps with AST (like in groovy). Le 13 août 2013 08:53, Alex Baranosky alexander.barano...@gmail.com a écrit : To me you cannot separate Clojure's syntax from its capabilities, because a number of its capabilities are enabled by the syntax. On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 10:55 PM, Christian Sperandio christian.speran...@gmail.com wrote: I think the choice of a language has always a subjective part. Particularly when you learn a language by yourself for pleasure. Because it's 'for pleasure' you want to learn a fun stuff. At work, I believe the subjective part works against a choice. Currently, at my office, the 8 other colleagues don't want to take a look at Clojure because of its LISP syntax. Their brain blocks and they don't hear you when you talk about the language capabilities. Le 13 août 2013 03:14, Devin Walters dev...@gmail.com a écrit : I have to echo previous sentiments. I'm not going to fill out the survey because as it currently stands, it seems like it's begging for a conclusion that satisfies the author. I'd like to see more targeted questions w/r/t syntax. But there again, I think this kind of question is highly subjective, and likely to provide a narrow view of what people *actually* care about in Clojure: writing great programs, being inspired to dig deeper, realizing creative potential, etc. '(Devin Walters) On Aug 12, 2013, at 7:21 PM, Ramesh ramesh10dul...@gmail.com wrote: Great points here! I think once someone is comfortable with Clojure, Scala will be more disgusting than Java. This is because, Scala has such great adornments, ironically aspiring toward simplification. -ramesh On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 7:58 AM, David Pollak feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com wrote: A couple of quick reactions... The survey itself is too flat. It's like asking do you like red or green? Well... I like green on my walls, but I like red on my ties. Scala has macros and a much richer syntax (although doing anything like core.async with Scala macros might be like putting tabsco on an open cut... just sayin') so I don't think the syntax and the macro stuff is a one-to-one mapping. People learn to work with a variety of syntaxes and are successful with them. Java and C++ have viscously awful syntax, yet they are very popular and most users of the languages don't notice. Both C and Lisp model an abstract computer and have syntax that reflects the computer that they model and to my mind, that helps the user of each language grok the abstract computer they are programming. I'd like a two-way mapping between a Clojure and an Excel-like formula language. That way people could write one-liner Clojure functions in a syntax that non-programmers are already comfortable with. I'm noodling with something like that right now. I think Jay and Colin are saying something very, very important: Clojure feels uncomfortable until it feels very comfortable and then there's no going back. I am not yet comfortable with Clojure's syntax, but I totally appreciate it. But I'm doing work in Scala, Java, and Clojure all for pay all in the same week every week... and bouncing among all three makes getting comfortable with Clojure a little slow. Further, I fear (deeply... in my bones) that once I am comfortable with Clojure, doing
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
luni, 12 august 2013, 11:00:27 UTC+3, Alan Forrester a scris: Do you have arguments against Clojure's current syntax? Alan Well, there are disadvantages. And I don't mean Clojure in particular, but lisp in general. Flattening everything to lists and similar data structures sucks out some of the sugar from the grammar and it becomes harder for the brain to process. Yes you can always train your brain, but that's not the point of this thread. Clojure brings indeed some nice improvements to the lisp syntax by making other data structure first class as well (while lisp has only lists). -- -- 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.
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
That isn't universally true. For me it was the opposite: this syntax made it easier for my brain to process than any other language, even when I was first learning it. Maybe my brain is diabetic and just can't handle syntactic sugar. But I bet I'm not the only person like this. On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 5:05 AM, Răzvan Rotaru razvan.rot...@gmail.comwrote: luni, 12 august 2013, 11:00:27 UTC+3, Alan Forrester a scris: Do you have arguments against Clojure's current syntax? Alan Well, there are disadvantages. And I don't mean Clojure in particular, but lisp in general. Flattening everything to lists and similar data structures sucks out some of the sugar from the grammar and it becomes harder for the brain to process. Yes you can always train your brain, but that's not the point of this thread. Clojure brings indeed some nice improvements to the lisp syntax by making other data structure first class as well (while lisp has only lists). -- -- 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.
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
Hi, I actually think that this is a really important question and for me despite the fact that I *love* Clojure my answer is NO, i don't like the syntax. To me it represents a significant barrier for reading. When I read an imperative OOP language I instinctively see through the code what the author wants to do. With LISP the first instructions of a code block are those that are most inside (nested) so looking at the ouside instructions I can't figure out why are they there because I don't know what is going into them as arguments. I have to follow the parens inside and then bactrack back. One particular rant is that to make the code more readable I use lots of let bindings to make the subexpressions named. And here I hate the fact that let-s create another parens and indentation level. Many of my functions have let statements so in order to write a function I have one function-level indentation and one let-level indentation. I know that it makes sense but coming from a Ruby world I like when I have to do more typing to achieve some kind of a special case and less or no typing to get the default case, which is here not true. I know that it is crazy and appalling but I actually like the syntax that Clarity preprocessor is doing: https://github.com/one-more-minute/clarity Though I agree that using it as a macro is kinda crazy and overall it is not worth the effort. M. Dne pondělí, 12. srpna 2013 9:52:53 UTC+2 Răzvan Rotaru napsal(a): Hi, I'm curious about the general opinion on the Clojure syntax, whether people actually like it or just use it because it provides macros. So I would like to ask you to participate in a poll. Thank You. Here's the link: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1GSgfkeThpUYlgFVzhhNIgA1JbTilu6S9eudq_Sbxl34/viewform Răzvan -- -- 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.
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
On Aug 13, 2013, at 10:02 AM, Steven Degutis wrote: That isn't universally true. For me it was the opposite: this syntax made it easier for my brain to process than any other language, even when I was first learning it. Maybe my brain is diabetic and just can't handle syntactic sugar. But I bet I'm not the only person like this. It's not just for brains of for macros. For any system that digests and processes programs Lisp's syntactic uniformity and explicitness (parentheses everywhere) can be helpful. I'd argue that this has been important at various points in the history of AI, certainly including a field in which I now work -- genetic programming -- in which you want to support random variation and recombination of programs. OTOH that doesn't mean that Lisp's syntax is optimal for these or any other purposes. As a substrate for evolutionary computation I now favor something completely different which would be abysmal as a programming language for human programmers*. And maybe there are other syntaxes more optimal for various human brains engaged in various pursuits. But Lisp does seem to occupy an interesting sweet spot in the space of languages, supporting lots of different kinds of things (often including code that manipulates code) pretty well. -Lee * http://hampshire.edu/lspector/push.html -- -- 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.
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
Then they are very weak in terms of tooling evaluation. If people are unwilling to look objectively at a pros/cons analysis why bother with them ? Why scrap the syntax for this kind of people ? I am not saying that there are not nice people to have a coffee with or a beer. I am just saying that they are not questioning their practices. This is part of their job. I met a CTO of a huge corporation last year who did not want anything to change. He's maintaing his shop in the stone age. Live and let die then. Acceptance based on such superficial criteria as syntax maybe ok for a hobby but for serious and challenging work ? In 2009 we ended up with comments like how will they find resources, ... after announcing that we were in prod with Clojure, the usual fud. Clojure is no more an risky choice, there is some traction out there, the keyword by itself appears now on job postings since what more than a year ago ? If the syntax was so much debilitating, you would not see this happening. It's not a cosmetic product marketing campaign :) Clojure establishes itself at what seems like a slow pace but if I look backward, there's been a lot of ground covered in five years and the momentum is still going on. In five years from now, I predict that we will see highly performant shops using Clojure as their main language to solve problems that seem today out of reach or for which previous attempts failed. Many will feel left behind. It's called evolution :) Luc P. I think the choice of a language has always a subjective part. Particularly when you learn a language by yourself for pleasure. Because it's 'for pleasure' you want to learn a fun stuff. At work, I believe the subjective part works against a choice. Currently, at my office, the 8 other colleagues don't want to take a look at Clojure because of its LISP syntax. Their brain blocks and they don't hear you when you talk about the language capabilities. Le 13 août 2013 03:14, Devin Walters dev...@gmail.com a écrit : I have to echo previous sentiments. I'm not going to fill out the survey because as it currently stands, it seems like it's begging for a conclusion that satisfies the author. I'd like to see more targeted questions w/r/t syntax. But there again, I think this kind of question is highly subjective, and likely to provide a narrow view of what people *actually* care about in Clojure: writing great programs, being inspired to dig deeper, realizing creative potential, etc. '(Devin Walters) On Aug 12, 2013, at 7:21 PM, Ramesh ramesh10dul...@gmail.com wrote: Great points here! I think once someone is comfortable with Clojure, Scala will be more disgusting than Java. This is because, Scala has such great adornments, ironically aspiring toward simplification. -ramesh On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 7:58 AM, David Pollak feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com wrote: A couple of quick reactions... The survey itself is too flat. It's like asking do you like red or green? Well... I like green on my walls, but I like red on my ties. Scala has macros and a much richer syntax (although doing anything like core.async with Scala macros might be like putting tabsco on an open cut... just sayin') so I don't think the syntax and the macro stuff is a one-to-one mapping. People learn to work with a variety of syntaxes and are successful with them. Java and C++ have viscously awful syntax, yet they are very popular and most users of the languages don't notice. Both C and Lisp model an abstract computer and have syntax that reflects the computer that they model and to my mind, that helps the user of each language grok the abstract computer they are programming. I'd like a two-way mapping between a Clojure and an Excel-like formula language. That way people could write one-liner Clojure functions in a syntax that non-programmers are already comfortable with. I'm noodling with something like that right now. I think Jay and Colin are saying something very, very important: Clojure feels uncomfortable until it feels very comfortable and then there's no going back. I am not yet comfortable with Clojure's syntax, but I totally appreciate it. But I'm doing work in Scala, Java, and Clojure all for pay all in the same week every week... and bouncing among all three makes getting comfortable with Clojure a little slow. Further, I fear (deeply... in my bones) that once I am comfortable with Clojure, doing Scala will be as disgusting as doing Java is after 7 years of Scala. :-( On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 12:52 AM, Răzvan Rotaru razvan.rot...@gmail.comwrote: Hi, I'm curious about the general opinion on the Clojure syntax, whether people actually like it or just use it because it provides macros. So I would like to ask you to participate in a poll. Thank You. Here's the link:
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
On Monday, 12 August 2013 15:52:53 UTC+8, Răzvan Rotaru wrote: Hi, I'm curious about the general opinion on the Clojure syntax, whether people actually like it or just use it because it provides macros. So I would like to ask you to participate in a poll. Thank You. The importance of syntax in programming languages is vastly exaggerated. Syntax alone makes no difference to what you can do with a language in a computational sense. The value mostly comes down to familiarity (which is entirely personal) and practicality (for which different domains may have different trade-offs / requirements). There is therefore no such thing as perfect syntax - it depends who you are and what you are doing. That being said, Clojure syntax represents a number of excellent design decisions: 1. It is homoiconic (which makes it much more practical for macros / code generation / DSLs) 2. An expression (function application) is represented as a single form. Arguably this is *the* fundamental building block of code. 3. Forms are consistently delimited with matched parentheses (which makes it very convenient for editing / quick prototyping with code blocks) 4. It is a Lisp (which gives familiarity to Lisp users at least) 5. It is very regular (which makes it convenient for code generation and programmatic code analysis) 6. It uses visually differentiated forms in sensible ways (e.g. [] for argument lists) 7. It is whitespace invariant (which IMHO makes rapid editing easier and avoids subtle bugs) 8. There is no ambiguity about operator precedence / evaluation order 9. It has an excellent range of data literals 10. It tends to be concise (probably more to do with the powerful standard functions than the syntax, but still) 11. It has a very convenient syntax for host interop A few legitimate criticisms of Clojure syntax: 1. It is unfamiliar to people coming from the most popular paradigms (i.e. C/Java). Fine, but time to learn :-) 2. The lack of infix notation is unfamiliar for anyone used to conventional mathematical notation (i.e. most people). Again, this is just a learning curve. 3. The reader macros are tricky (especially when they interact with metadata, the environment, the compiler, type hints and literal handling in non-obvious ways) 4. Quoting / unquoting can be tricky (I think this is an unavoidable trade-off however if you want the benefits of a homoiconic Lisp) Overall though, I think the advantages significantly outweigh the disadvantages. This is true *even if* you have to go through a learning curve after coming from a non-Lisp background. I'm not aware of any general purpose language designed for power users (i.e. those who appreciate the power of macros and similar features) that can claim an objectively better syntax. To summarise: +1 for Clojure's current syntax :-) -- -- 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.
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
luni, 12 august 2013, 18:34:34 UTC+3, Phillip Lord a scris: David Pollak feeder.of...@gmail.com javascript: writes: The survey itself is too flat. It's like asking do you like red or green? Well... I like green on my walls, but I like red on my ties. I'd agree with this. Do you like is also a relative thing, I think. I mean, compared to what? Java? Or common lisp. Liking something is subjective by definition. That's the purpose of the poll. If you are using Clojure I just want to know your subjective feeling towards the syntax. -- -- 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.
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
Speaking of the purpose of the poll, what is it? What purpose does an off-list poll serve that an on-list answer doesn't? I'm curious: is this for a school assignment or for an employer or...? R On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 10:05 AM, Răzvan Rotaru razvan.rot...@gmail.com wrote: [SNIP] Liking something is subjective by definition. That's the purpose of the poll. If you are using Clojure I just want to know your subjective feeling towards the syntax. -- Russell Whitaker http://twitter.com/OrthoNormalRuss http://www.linkedin.com/pub/russell-whitaker/0/b86/329 -- -- 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.
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
On 12 Aug 2013, at 08:52, Răzvan Rotaru razvan.rot...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I'm curious about the general opinion on the Clojure syntax, whether people actually like it or just use it because it provides macros. So I would like to ask you to participate in a poll. Thank You. Here's the link: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1GSgfkeThpUYlgFVzhhNIgA1JbTilu6S9eudq_Sbxl34/viewform Do you have arguments against Clojure's current syntax? Alan -- -- 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.
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
isolating the syntax from the other features of the language is a like removing a part from a rocket engine however small it may be and wondering if it will lift off without it. Macros are the first thing you may think of related to syntax change I am convinced that other areas benefit from the syntax. It's early here and without caffein I will not even attempt to make a list.. Who would choose a tool based on its syntax alone ? A tool = feature set = more or less productivity. We're not in a grocery store choosing between a banana and a cauliflower based on their respective color to accompany a steak. Banana + steak ? Wow... maybe some chef tried it or will but personally I pass, as good looking as the banana might be :) It's like emacs to me (joking here guys :) Your poll has only two questions, I would have added at least a third one, how many programming languages have you been using at work ? Maybe a fourth one, for how many years have you been programming ? How much weight does the first answer have if you do not assess the comparison basis of people answering the first question ? I would probably drop the second one. A pool looks like a simple tool but it's hard work to put together questions to get meaningful data. Luc P. Hi, I'm curious about the general opinion on the Clojure syntax, whether people actually like it or just use it because it provides macros. So I would like to ask you to participate in a poll. Thank You. Here's the link: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1GSgfkeThpUYlgFVzhhNIgA1JbTilu6S9eudq_Sbxl34/viewform Răzvan -- -- 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. -- Softaddictslprefonta...@softaddicts.ca sent by ibisMail from my ipad! -- -- 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.
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
I'll repeat something I've said publicly several times (sorry if you've previously heard it) - My first exposure to Clojure was a Stu Halloway blog post: http://thinkrelevance.com/blog/tags/java-next. At the time I was writing mostly Ruby some Java. I remember finding Clojure syntax repulsive. Despite my gut reaction, I gave Clojure a shot for various (not relevant to this conversation) reasons. Fast forward to today, I find non-homoiconic languages to be repulsive. The same feeling applies to inconsistencies - e.g. import syntax != assignment syntax != control flow syntax ... you get the idea. I think it's common, and okay, for programmers to see Clojure (lisp?) syntax and feel uncomfortable. If they can't get past that and give it a try, that's okay as well - languages fit people in different ways, there's no 'best' language for the masses. This quote feels relevant: Programmers know the benefits of everything and the tradeoffs of nothing -- Rich Hickey. Lisp syntax is one of the oldest in our industry. Rich's selection wasn't arbitrary. If you want to challenge it, you're going to want to know the tradeoffs very, very well. On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 7:43 AM, Softaddicts lprefonta...@softaddicts.ca wrote: isolating the syntax from the other features of the language is a like removing a part from a rocket engine however small it may be and wondering if it will lift off without it. Macros are the first thing you may think of related to syntax change I am convinced that other areas benefit from the syntax. It's early here and without caffein I will not even attempt to make a list.. Who would choose a tool based on its syntax alone ? A tool = feature set = more or less productivity. We're not in a grocery store choosing between a banana and a cauliflower based on their respective color to accompany a steak. Banana + steak ? Wow... maybe some chef tried it or will but personally I pass, as good looking as the banana might be :) It's like emacs to me (joking here guys :) Your poll has only two questions, I would have added at least a third one, how many programming languages have you been using at work ? Maybe a fourth one, for how many years have you been programming ? How much weight does the first answer have if you do not assess the comparison basis of people answering the first question ? I would probably drop the second one. A pool looks like a simple tool but it's hard work to put together questions to get meaningful data. Luc P. Hi, I'm curious about the general opinion on the Clojure syntax, whether people actually like it or just use it because it provides macros. So I would like to ask you to participate in a poll. Thank You. Here's the link: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1GSgfkeThpUYlgFVzhhNIgA1JbTilu6S9eudq_Sbxl34/viewform Răzvan -- -- 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. -- Softaddictslprefonta...@softaddicts.ca sent by ibisMail from my ipad! -- -- 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
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
I think that jarring effect is actually beneficial, it helps stop people carrying invalid assumptions across. It is all too easy to slip into writing code the old way using the new tool. The lack of familiarity between LISPs and Java (Groovy, Scala, rails etc.) makes it that much harder to slip. Personally, this is why I made my newly recruited Windows/Eclipse/Java team go cold turkey and use xmonad, lein and emacs. Sure, it was disruptive and I wasn't the most popular guy for a while but the 'clean slate' approach was definitely helpful. Fun times were (eventually) had by all :). On Monday, 12 August 2013 13:06:43 UTC+1, Jay Fields wrote: I'll repeat something I've said publicly several times (sorry if you've previously heard it) - My first exposure to Clojure was a Stu Halloway blog post: http://thinkrelevance.com/blog/tags/java-next. At the time I was writing mostly Ruby some Java. I remember finding Clojure syntax repulsive. Despite my gut reaction, I gave Clojure a shot for various (not relevant to this conversation) reasons. Fast forward to today, I find non-homoiconic languages to be repulsive. The same feeling applies to inconsistencies - e.g. import syntax != assignment syntax != control flow syntax ... you get the idea. I think it's common, and okay, for programmers to see Clojure (lisp?) syntax and feel uncomfortable. If they can't get past that and give it a try, that's okay as well - languages fit people in different ways, there's no 'best' language for the masses. This quote feels relevant: Programmers know the benefits of everything and the tradeoffs of nothing -- Rich Hickey. Lisp syntax is one of the oldest in our industry. Rich's selection wasn't arbitrary. If you want to challenge it, you're going to want to know the tradeoffs very, very well. On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 7:43 AM, Softaddicts lprefo...@softaddicts.ca javascript: wrote: isolating the syntax from the other features of the language is a like removing a part from a rocket engine however small it may be and wondering if it will lift off without it. Macros are the first thing you may think of related to syntax change I am convinced that other areas benefit from the syntax. It's early here and without caffein I will not even attempt to make a list.. Who would choose a tool based on its syntax alone ? A tool = feature set = more or less productivity. We're not in a grocery store choosing between a banana and a cauliflower based on their respective color to accompany a steak. Banana + steak ? Wow... maybe some chef tried it or will but personally I pass, as good looking as the banana might be :) It's like emacs to me (joking here guys :) Your poll has only two questions, I would have added at least a third one, how many programming languages have you been using at work ? Maybe a fourth one, for how many years have you been programming ? How much weight does the first answer have if you do not assess the comparison basis of people answering the first question ? I would probably drop the second one. A pool looks like a simple tool but it's hard work to put together questions to get meaningful data. Luc P. Hi, I'm curious about the general opinion on the Clojure syntax, whether people actually like it or just use it because it provides macros. So I would like to ask you to participate in a poll. Thank You. Here's the link: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1GSgfkeThpUYlgFVzhhNIgA1JbTilu6S9eudq_Sbxl34/viewform Răzvan -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clo...@googlegroups.comjavascript: Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+u...@googlegroups.com javascript: 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+u...@googlegroups.com javascript:. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- Softaddictslprefo...@softaddicts.ca javascript: sent by ibisMail from my ipad! -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clo...@googlegroups.comjavascript: Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+u...@googlegroups.com javascript: For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
A couple of quick reactions... The survey itself is too flat. It's like asking do you like red or green? Well... I like green on my walls, but I like red on my ties. Scala has macros and a much richer syntax (although doing anything like core.async with Scala macros might be like putting tabsco on an open cut... just sayin') so I don't think the syntax and the macro stuff is a one-to-one mapping. People learn to work with a variety of syntaxes and are successful with them. Java and C++ have viscously awful syntax, yet they are very popular and most users of the languages don't notice. Both C and Lisp model an abstract computer and have syntax that reflects the computer that they model and to my mind, that helps the user of each language grok the abstract computer they are programming. I'd like a two-way mapping between a Clojure and an Excel-like formula language. That way people could write one-liner Clojure functions in a syntax that non-programmers are already comfortable with. I'm noodling with something like that right now. I think Jay and Colin are saying something very, very important: Clojure feels uncomfortable until it feels very comfortable and then there's no going back. I am not yet comfortable with Clojure's syntax, but I totally appreciate it. But I'm doing work in Scala, Java, and Clojure all for pay all in the same week every week... and bouncing among all three makes getting comfortable with Clojure a little slow. Further, I fear (deeply... in my bones) that once I am comfortable with Clojure, doing Scala will be as disgusting as doing Java is after 7 years of Scala. :-( On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 12:52 AM, Răzvan Rotaru razvan.rot...@gmail.comwrote: Hi, I'm curious about the general opinion on the Clojure syntax, whether people actually like it or just use it because it provides macros. So I would like to ask you to participate in a poll. Thank You. Here's the link: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1GSgfkeThpUYlgFVzhhNIgA1JbTilu6S9eudq_Sbxl34/viewform Răzvan -- -- 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. -- Telegram, Simply Beautiful CMS https://telegr.am Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp Blog: http://goodstuff.im -- -- 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.
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
David Pollak feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com writes: The survey itself is too flat. It's like asking do you like red or green? Well... I like green on my walls, but I like red on my ties. I'd agree with this. Do you like is also a relative thing, I think. I mean, compared to what? Java? Or common lisp. The thing that I don't like, is a common documentation markup for refering to other functions, and params. So, compare: clojure.core/cons ([x seq]) Returns a new seq where x is the first element and seq is the rest. to this cons is a built-in function in `C source code'. (cons CAR CDR) Create a new cons, give it CAR and CDR as components, and return it. The upper case stuff is a bit shouty, but I like the fact that you can distinguish the CAR as a parameter name typographically, which you can't with x in clojure. Likewise, here: clojure.core/defmacro ([name doc-string? attr-map? [params*] body] [name doc-string? attr-map? ([params*] body) + attr-map?]) Macro Like defn, but the resulting function name is declared as a macro and will be used as a macro by the compiler when it is call It's not obvious that defn is a function name. Does this mean I like or dislike clojure syntax? Phil -- -- 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.
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
In 2008 I was surveying alternatives to Java, I wanted something concise and needed better support for concurrency, parallelism , ... We had a prototype written in Java but I could not see how we could get a decent product out using Java without making the business case crumble. I looked at Scala but to me it was not a significant departure from Java. After looking at Ruby which at that time seemed weak in terms of concurrency (jruby was not out yet or in its infancy), I found Clojure. This was not by accident. I started to look for a Lisp running on the JVM to leverage part of the work that had been done here, code = data and expressiveness after the other alternatives failed to meet my checklist. This selection was based strictly on features. Not on the surface of things which can be very noisy and very deceiving in the long run. I was almost certain that I could leverage the JVM stuff afterward, reuse some existing code and benefit from the JVM legacy. I did not fell in the Scala trap nor in the Ruby trap except for a few GUIs made with Rail (these days it's ClojureScript that's replacing it) :) I knew Lisp syntax already (aside from a dozen other languages) but I did not consider this as a selection criteria. I wanted expressiveness and Lisps had a good track record in this area for decades. As a bonus, Clojure syntax is an improvement over older Lisps and that is overlooked by many who do not looked at traditional Lisp code. Features, features, Luc A couple of quick reactions... The survey itself is too flat. It's like asking do you like red or green? Well... I like green on my walls, but I like red on my ties. Scala has macros and a much richer syntax (although doing anything like core.async with Scala macros might be like putting tabsco on an open cut... just sayin') so I don't think the syntax and the macro stuff is a one-to-one mapping. People learn to work with a variety of syntaxes and are successful with them. Java and C++ have viscously awful syntax, yet they are very popular and most users of the languages don't notice. Both C and Lisp model an abstract computer and have syntax that reflects the computer that they model and to my mind, that helps the user of each language grok the abstract computer they are programming. I'd like a two-way mapping between a Clojure and an Excel-like formula language. That way people could write one-liner Clojure functions in a syntax that non-programmers are already comfortable with. I'm noodling with something like that right now. I think Jay and Colin are saying something very, very important: Clojure feels uncomfortable until it feels very comfortable and then there's no going back. I am not yet comfortable with Clojure's syntax, but I totally appreciate it. But I'm doing work in Scala, Java, and Clojure all for pay all in the same week every week... and bouncing among all three makes getting comfortable with Clojure a little slow. Further, I fear (deeply.. in my bones) that once I am comfortable with Clojure, doing Scala will be as disgusting as doing Java is after 7 years of Scala. :-( On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 12:52 AM, Răzvan Rotaru razvan.rot...@gmail.comwrote: Hi, I'm curious about the general opinion on the Clojure syntax, whether people actually like it or just use it because it provides macros. So I would like to ask you to participate in a poll. Thank You. Here's the link: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1GSgfkeThpUYlgFVzhhNIgA1JbTilu6S9eudq_Sbxl34/viewform Răzvan -- -- 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. -- Telegram, Simply Beautiful CMS https://telegr.am Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp Blog: http://goodstuff.im -- -- 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
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
I love Clojure's syntax, and not because of macros. I love it because it's
both extremely consistent and extremely simple. Just some quick examples:
- In Ruby, blocks use || for param lists and functions use (). In
Clojure it's always the same.
- In Ruby if you pass a block argument to a method, you use do/end, but
if you pass it as a non-block argument, you use lambda/proc/Proc.new. If
you're passing it by name, you use for block arguments and omit it for
regular arguments. In Clojure it's always a regular function, whether
anonymous or not.
- In Ruby, depending on whether you use {} or do/end for blocks, they
become attached to different method calls depending on if you used
parentheses for your intended method call(s) or not. In Clojure,
parentheses completely eliminate potential for this ambiguity.
- In Ruby, there are only some methods you can name with special
characters, such as and foo=, and they're special-cased by the parser or
something so you can write names bob and self.foo = bar, but you
can't write a method called !! if you wanted to. In Clojure you can name
functions anything that doesn't use the (very few) built-in syntax
characters like parentheses.
I did Ruby for the past 3 years so these come to mind most quickly. But I'm
sure I could come up with examples in all other languages I've used
demonstrating that Clojure's syntax is the most consistent and most simple
of them all. And simple is good, since it saves your brain cells some
energy to work on the real problems.
Background: My day job is a Clojure web app, which I've been working on for
almost a year now.
-Steven
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 2:52 AM, Răzvan Rotaru razvan.rot...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi,
I'm curious about the general opinion on the Clojure syntax, whether
people actually like it or just use it because it provides macros. So I
would like to ask you to participate in a poll. Thank You.
Here's the link:
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1GSgfkeThpUYlgFVzhhNIgA1JbTilu6S9eudq_Sbxl34/viewform
Răzvan
--
--
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.
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
I also like Clojure's syntax because it shows me the structure of my function more clearly than does the imperative code I've written in other languages. My functions always turn out in either pyramids or triangles or walls. Each function's shape indicates its nature very visually, including potential flaws and ways it could be refactored. For example functions with a pyramid shape usually turn out to be trying to do both a cond-type branching and the work inside one/some of the branches, which is probably too much responsibility for one function. Short functions with a relative straight line going down the left edge is a sign of good health. Walls are signs that I'm getting imperative again and could either clean something up with - or - or splitting out into more functions, or maybe all of these. I couldn't get this level of quality of visual feedback from my Ruby code. -Steven On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 2:52 AM, Răzvan Rotaru razvan.rot...@gmail.comwrote: Hi, I'm curious about the general opinion on the Clojure syntax, whether people actually like it or just use it because it provides macros. So I would like to ask you to participate in a poll. Thank You. Here's the link: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1GSgfkeThpUYlgFVzhhNIgA1JbTilu6S9eudq_Sbxl34/viewform Răzvan -- -- 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.
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
Nice tip - thanks. On Monday, 12 August 2013 18:09:56 UTC+1, Steven Degutis wrote: I also like Clojure's syntax because it shows me the structure of my function more clearly than does the imperative code I've written in other languages. My functions always turn out in either pyramids or triangles or walls. Each function's shape indicates its nature very visually, including potential flaws and ways it could be refactored. For example functions with a pyramid shape usually turn out to be trying to do both a cond-type branching and the work inside one/some of the branches, which is probably too much responsibility for one function. Short functions with a relative straight line going down the left edge is a sign of good health. Walls are signs that I'm getting imperative again and could either clean something up with - or - or splitting out into more functions, or maybe all of these. I couldn't get this level of quality of visual feedback from my Ruby code. -Steven On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 2:52 AM, Răzvan Rotaru razvan...@gmail.comjavascript: wrote: Hi, I'm curious about the general opinion on the Clojure syntax, whether people actually like it or just use it because it provides macros. So I would like to ask you to participate in a poll. Thank You. Here's the link: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1GSgfkeThpUYlgFVzhhNIgA1JbTilu6S9eudq_Sbxl34/viewform Răzvan -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clo...@googlegroups.comjavascript: Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+u...@googlegroups.com javascript: 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+u...@googlegroups.com javascript:. 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.
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
Great points here! I think once someone is comfortable with Clojure, Scala will be more disgusting than Java. This is because, Scala has such great adornments, ironically aspiring toward simplification. -ramesh On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 7:58 AM, David Pollak feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com wrote: A couple of quick reactions... The survey itself is too flat. It's like asking do you like red or green? Well... I like green on my walls, but I like red on my ties. Scala has macros and a much richer syntax (although doing anything like core.async with Scala macros might be like putting tabsco on an open cut... just sayin') so I don't think the syntax and the macro stuff is a one-to-one mapping. People learn to work with a variety of syntaxes and are successful with them. Java and C++ have viscously awful syntax, yet they are very popular and most users of the languages don't notice. Both C and Lisp model an abstract computer and have syntax that reflects the computer that they model and to my mind, that helps the user of each language grok the abstract computer they are programming. I'd like a two-way mapping between a Clojure and an Excel-like formula language. That way people could write one-liner Clojure functions in a syntax that non-programmers are already comfortable with. I'm noodling with something like that right now. I think Jay and Colin are saying something very, very important: Clojure feels uncomfortable until it feels very comfortable and then there's no going back. I am not yet comfortable with Clojure's syntax, but I totally appreciate it. But I'm doing work in Scala, Java, and Clojure all for pay all in the same week every week... and bouncing among all three makes getting comfortable with Clojure a little slow. Further, I fear (deeply... in my bones) that once I am comfortable with Clojure, doing Scala will be as disgusting as doing Java is after 7 years of Scala. :-( On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 12:52 AM, Răzvan Rotaru razvan.rot...@gmail.comwrote: Hi, I'm curious about the general opinion on the Clojure syntax, whether people actually like it or just use it because it provides macros. So I would like to ask you to participate in a poll. Thank You. Here's the link: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1GSgfkeThpUYlgFVzhhNIgA1JbTilu6S9eudq_Sbxl34/viewform Răzvan -- -- 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. -- Telegram, Simply Beautiful CMS https://telegr.am Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp Blog: http://goodstuff.im -- -- 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.
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
I have to echo previous sentiments. I'm not going to fill out the survey because as it currently stands, it seems like it's begging for a conclusion that satisfies the author. I'd like to see more targeted questions w/r/t syntax. But there again, I think this kind of question is highly subjective, and likely to provide a narrow view of what people *actually* care about in Clojure: writing great programs, being inspired to dig deeper, realizing creative potential, etc. '(Devin Walters) On Aug 12, 2013, at 7:21 PM, Ramesh ramesh10dul...@gmail.com wrote: Great points here! I think once someone is comfortable with Clojure, Scala will be more disgusting than Java. This is because, Scala has such great adornments, ironically aspiring toward simplification. -ramesh On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 7:58 AM, David Pollak feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com wrote: A couple of quick reactions... The survey itself is too flat. It's like asking do you like red or green? Well... I like green on my walls, but I like red on my ties. Scala has macros and a much richer syntax (although doing anything like core.async with Scala macros might be like putting tabsco on an open cut... just sayin') so I don't think the syntax and the macro stuff is a one-to-one mapping. People learn to work with a variety of syntaxes and are successful with them. Java and C++ have viscously awful syntax, yet they are very popular and most users of the languages don't notice. Both C and Lisp model an abstract computer and have syntax that reflects the computer that they model and to my mind, that helps the user of each language grok the abstract computer they are programming. I'd like a two-way mapping between a Clojure and an Excel-like formula language. That way people could write one-liner Clojure functions in a syntax that non-programmers are already comfortable with. I'm noodling with something like that right now. I think Jay and Colin are saying something very, very important: Clojure feels uncomfortable until it feels very comfortable and then there's no going back. I am not yet comfortable with Clojure's syntax, but I totally appreciate it. But I'm doing work in Scala, Java, and Clojure all for pay all in the same week every week... and bouncing among all three makes getting comfortable with Clojure a little slow. Further, I fear (deeply... in my bones) that once I am comfortable with Clojure, doing Scala will be as disgusting as doing Java is after 7 years of Scala. :-( On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 12:52 AM, Răzvan Rotaru razvan.rot...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I'm curious about the general opinion on the Clojure syntax, whether people actually like it or just use it because it provides macros. So I would like to ask you to participate in a poll. Thank You. Here's the link: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1GSgfkeThpUYlgFVzhhNIgA1JbTilu6S9eudq_Sbxl34/viewform Răzvan -- -- 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. -- Telegram, Simply Beautiful CMS https://telegr.am Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp Blog: http://goodstuff.im -- -- 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
Re: Do you like the Clojure syntax?
I think the choice of a language has always a subjective part. Particularly when you learn a language by yourself for pleasure. Because it's 'for pleasure' you want to learn a fun stuff. At work, I believe the subjective part works against a choice. Currently, at my office, the 8 other colleagues don't want to take a look at Clojure because of its LISP syntax. Their brain blocks and they don't hear you when you talk about the language capabilities. Le 13 août 2013 03:14, Devin Walters dev...@gmail.com a écrit : I have to echo previous sentiments. I'm not going to fill out the survey because as it currently stands, it seems like it's begging for a conclusion that satisfies the author. I'd like to see more targeted questions w/r/t syntax. But there again, I think this kind of question is highly subjective, and likely to provide a narrow view of what people *actually* care about in Clojure: writing great programs, being inspired to dig deeper, realizing creative potential, etc. '(Devin Walters) On Aug 12, 2013, at 7:21 PM, Ramesh ramesh10dul...@gmail.com wrote: Great points here! I think once someone is comfortable with Clojure, Scala will be more disgusting than Java. This is because, Scala has such great adornments, ironically aspiring toward simplification. -ramesh On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 7:58 AM, David Pollak feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com wrote: A couple of quick reactions... The survey itself is too flat. It's like asking do you like red or green? Well... I like green on my walls, but I like red on my ties. Scala has macros and a much richer syntax (although doing anything like core.async with Scala macros might be like putting tabsco on an open cut... just sayin') so I don't think the syntax and the macro stuff is a one-to-one mapping. People learn to work with a variety of syntaxes and are successful with them. Java and C++ have viscously awful syntax, yet they are very popular and most users of the languages don't notice. Both C and Lisp model an abstract computer and have syntax that reflects the computer that they model and to my mind, that helps the user of each language grok the abstract computer they are programming. I'd like a two-way mapping between a Clojure and an Excel-like formula language. That way people could write one-liner Clojure functions in a syntax that non-programmers are already comfortable with. I'm noodling with something like that right now. I think Jay and Colin are saying something very, very important: Clojure feels uncomfortable until it feels very comfortable and then there's no going back. I am not yet comfortable with Clojure's syntax, but I totally appreciate it. But I'm doing work in Scala, Java, and Clojure all for pay all in the same week every week... and bouncing among all three makes getting comfortable with Clojure a little slow. Further, I fear (deeply... in my bones) that once I am comfortable with Clojure, doing Scala will be as disgusting as doing Java is after 7 years of Scala. :-( On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 12:52 AM, Răzvan Rotaru razvan.rot...@gmail.comwrote: Hi, I'm curious about the general opinion on the Clojure syntax, whether people actually like it or just use it because it provides macros. So I would like to ask you to participate in a poll. Thank You. Here's the link: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1GSgfkeThpUYlgFVzhhNIgA1JbTilu6S9eudq_Sbxl34/viewform Răzvan -- -- 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. -- Telegram, Simply Beautiful CMS https://telegr.am Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp Blog: http://goodstuff.im -- -- 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
