I would only add that from what I understand so far, it's pretty easy to use Clojure to define what Java would recognize as Java classes. (Is this wrong?)
I find ABCL-Java interoperability to be workable but less pleasant. I think this has to do with the fact that ABCL takes an existing language with its own type system, etc., and allows translation to/from Java, whereas Clojure types are built on Java types from the start. On Thursday, November 28, 2013 1:10:09 AM UTC-6, Gary Verhaegen wrote: > > Clojure is a separate dialect of LISP that happens to run on the JVM. It > is not a tool to magically turn existing LISP dialects into Java. That > said, manually converting from Scheme or Common Lisp to Clojure could be > relatively easy, if the LISP code is small. > > Clojure does not emit Java code, though, and for a more direct LISP to > Java bytecode translation I would advise you to take a look at either Kawa > Scheme or ABCL. > -- -- 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.
