On Apr 17, 8:31 pm, Antony Blakey <antony.bla...@gmail.com> wrote:
> As a lurker, considering Clojure for a project, the thing that is
> giving me pause isn't 1.0 per se, but the combination of a good
> library mechanism and documentation. I have Stuart's book, and I agree
> in the strongest possible terms that it should be a book explicitly
> about a stable Clojure 1.0. The choice for me is between Scala and
> Clojure, and the languages themselves are not a discriminator - it's
> the environments around the languages that determine the outcome.
>
> It's not clear how to use the stuff in clojure-contrib, which
> certainly seems like the 'standard library' of useful tools that makes
> clojure into something other than a lispy language using Java libraries.
This is a good point. Using clojure.contrib is in fact extremely easy,
but it's hard to tell that from the point of view of a new user. I was
a new user recently enough to remember my initial confusion about how
to set up my development environment and how to arrange it so that
clojure.contrib was as readily accessible as it should be.
It turns out that getting past these obstacles is quite easy, but, as
I say, you can't tell that when you're coming in cold. That suggests
that documentation is the solution.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
