> > I think we need to be careful here about the association between Java > > and Clojure. Sure, they run on the JVM, but that is their *only* > > relationship (from a consumer's point of view) as far as I can see.
> Clojure != Java - different paradigms, different mindsets, different > beasts. Trying to "write Java in Clojure" seems to be entirely the > wrong thing to do. "Write Java in Scala" is a recommended on-ramp to > integrating Scala in your organisation. I don't think anyone is arguing that Clojure should be written as if it were Java, but that new users are often exposed to and have problems understanding classpaths and installing a jvm. And if it weren't for the nice Java interop, a significant number of users (myself included) would probably never have jumped on board. On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 2:29 PM, Colin Yates <colin.ya...@gmail.com> wrote: > If it weren't for McDonalds I wouldn't have such a large belly, but my > belly isn't McDonalds ;) I jest (obviously!), but I do think this is > a fundamental point. I (like a lot of others I expect) found Clojure > and Scala whilst looking for Java.next. I read a bit about Scala, and > part of its marketing is that there is no learning curve to start > writing Scala applications, due to Scala being a hybrid OO and > functional language. > > On the other hand, the very first thing I started doing when thinking > "how do I wield this Clojure tool" was trying to see how I can use it > to make OO solutions. And the answer was painfully - *because I was > asking the wrong question*. > > Clojure != Java - different paradigms, different mindsets, different > beasts. Trying to "write Java in Clojure" seems to be entirely the > wrong thing to do. "Write Java in Scala" is a recommended on-ramp to > integrating Scala in your organisation. > > Clarifications: > I use "Java" to mean more than the language, I use it to mean the > typical shape of implemented solutions using the Java programming > language, i.e. OO with anaemic domain models and a fair chunk of XML > and/or annotations. > > I keep mentioning Scala because this whole thread seems to be about > "newbie experience" (where newbie is in reference only to Clojure) and > I suspect most newbies will be thinking about Scala as well. > > On Jul 8, 7:15 pm, Jonathan Fischer Friberg <odysso...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > I don't agree that clojure is, or should be seen as something entirely > > different than java. If it weren't for java, clojure wouldn't have much > use > > at all. > > --- snip > > > I think we need to be careful here about the association between Java > > > and Clojure. Sure, they run on the JVM, but that is their *only* > > > relationship (from a consumer's point of view) as far as I can see. > > > > > For me, after a decade+ of developing Enterprise Java (primarily web) > > > applications I am sick and tired of all the hoops and ceremony > > > involved in building Java applications. More and more I am coming > > > (from reading other people's work - not my own discovery!) to realise > > > that most established "best-practice" is only required to answer an > > > insufficiency in the language itself. > --- snip > > -- > 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 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
