I think too many posters here are equating Clojure with Lisp. Clojure is a LISP, but it is not LISP itself.
* Mutability is not a given in all LISP implementations, only some of them. * STM transactions (i.e. state and time management upon non-mutable objects) is a Clojure concept, that no other LISP's have. So I will suggest the OP is not having a LISP ah-ha moment, but rather a Clojure ah-ha moment. Lisp does have it's ah-ha moments in other regards as I am sure is the case with any other language when you move from being able use the language for general programming to being able to use the language abstractions & ideology to change how you approach programs. It's not like programmers didn't have this when everyone moved to OO languages in the first place - they too had an ah-ha I get OO now. On Dec 19, 6:25 pm, Tim Daly <d...@axiom-developer.org> wrote: > On 12/19/2010 8:20 PM, Ken Wesson wrote:> On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 8:18 PM, > Tim Daly<d...@axiom-developer.org> wrote: > >> I didn't mean to imply that other people > >> don't have the "ah-hah!" experience with > >> other languages. However, I have only had > >> the (before lisp)|(after lisp) experience > >> with lisp. > > >> Your enlightenment might vary. > > >> Rich gave his "Whitehead" talk and brought > >> up the fact that OO languages get several > >> things wrong. > > Out of curiosity, which "several things" were these? > > http://www.infoq.com/presentations/Are-We-There-Yet-Rich-Hickey -- 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
