On Jan 3, 11:24 am, Jozef Wagner <jozef.wag...@gmail.com> wrote: > Some of my arguments are: > - Clojure has no custom reader macros, makes it easier to read others code > - Protocols and the way clojure handles data helps to explicitly formulate > specifications and designs > - Fresh syntax which improves readability > - Easy integration with familiar technologies thanks to JVM > - Modern collection types, not just lists
I've been playing a lot with common lisp these last few months, I'll just share my oppinion on these points: - Reader macros. How often are they used in common lisp anyway? And how many of these uses are abusive or inappropriate? I don't believe this has such a great impact on clojures popularity. - Im no expert in neither clojure protocols or CLOS, and I'd love for someone more knowledgeable to confirm or deny my suspicions, but aren't clojure protocols a variation on lisp generic functions, made to fit the jvm better and give better performance? What, other than absence of inheritance, do they give you over GFs? You can write java- like code in CLOS, but the way I've been using it is very similar to the way i use protocols in clojure. - If by fresh syntax you mean reader support for vectors and hash- tables, i agree, it's very convenient to have it built in, in common lisp I'd have to write my own reader macros to do it. And i'd have to document it, and tell everyone on my team to use it and not to get confused. - I don't believe i understand this completely, do you mean library support? If so, i agree. - Yes, clojures persistent collections are a huge win, and i miss them in common lisp, although if I'm a newcomer from java, or any other language without literal support for hash tables or arrays, or their persistent versions, common lisp at least doesn't make your life worse. In my opinion, and im sure some might disagree, even though clojure has a lot of technical advantages over other lisp dialects, and is generally a very well designed language, its popularity is mostly the result of exceptionally good marketing. Just look at any of Rich Hickeys talks, he doesn't say "Clojure is an awesome language, with these awesome features", he says "Here are these hard problems, heres clojure's solutions". People have used common lisp in large teams, its not inherently unsuited for that, it just lacked the right marketing. -- 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
