This thread has prompted me to accelerate my work on a wiki for
Clojure beginners. It's now up, with a discussion forum, a way for you
to contribute articles, and a link to my delicious.com Clojure links
(over 160!). Please check it out at
- http://www.gettingclojure.com
Please check it out. I
On Jun 30, 10:41 pm, Phil Hagelberg wrote:
> I wasn't complaining about what you said; I was just glad someone else
> was recognizing that talk is cheap and effort is not.
Ok, sorry, I misinterpreted your words.
Peace,
Alessio
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Goog
> For the time being, you could use nailgun. My clj script uses nailgun
> and for a warm start I can run clj -e "(System/exit 0)" in 20
> milliseconds.
Nice idea! I've incorporated it into my clj script as well:
http://www.taoeffect.com/other/clj.lsp.html
Run it with clj -ng and it will start t
Okay my 2 cent, just because I like long threads:
Clojure as 2 'noob attraction problems'
1) it has no simple setup that just works (I wonder if I can say 'just works'
too often but I doubt it). Neither EMACS, nor Eclips, nor Netbeans, nor
IntelliJ just work all have their quirks and most of th
On Jun 30, 5:15 pm, Chas Emerick wrote:
> An oldie-but-goodie post from Chouser talking about what clojure-in-
> clojure is and why it matters:
>
> http://blog.n01se.net/?p=41
To quote:
"But a more fascinating benefit is that porting Clojure to non-JVM
targets will be much easier. The majority of
That's a great first start. My only initial comment would be that
Clojure is a lisp, or maybe a Lisp, but it's definitely not a LISP. ;-)
- Chas
On Jun 30, 2010, at 8:11 PM, Mike Meyer wrote:
Ok, my turn to contribute something more than just messages. Still
just talking, though.
http://ww
Not one person has ever said *anything* about Clojure not
interoperating smoothly with Java, or abandoning the JVM. Suggesting,
implying, or speculating about anything otherwise, bluntly or not, is
sort of laughable given how much work Rich has been putting into 1.2
(and later, with the eq
Ok, my turn to contribute something more than just messages. Still
just talking, though.
http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/papers/simple-clojure.html
is a writeup on how to get as much out of clojure as possible with a
minimal amount of Java infrastructure knowledge. It's still a WIP, so
feedback, co
> Point is, I'd rather just use Clojure.
Ah, well in that case, have you tried using Nailgun?
http://martiansoftware.com/nailgun/index.html
On Jun 30, 2010, at 3:34 PM, David Nolen wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 1:55 PM, Greg wrote:
>> For example, I would love to see some portion of Clojur
won't someone please think of the children?
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 1:42 PM, Brian Goslinga
wrote:
> On Jun 30, 12:50 pm, David Nolen wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 1:42 PM, cageface wrote:
>> > I don't know what the implementation plans are exactly for clojure-in-
>> > clojure but abandonin
On Jun 30, 12:50 pm, David Nolen wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 1:42 PM, cageface wrote:
> > I don't know what the implementation plans are exactly for clojure-in-
> > clojure but abandoning the JVM would be extremely unwise.
>
> Clojure-in-Clojure isn't about abandoning the JVM. It's about imp
>> > Thank you. I'm hearing a lot of "somebody should do $X" in this thread
>> > and precious little "I'm going to help by doing $X".
>>
>> > The former is useless; please stop it.
>>
>> Or rather to be less harsh: the former has been discussed to death by
>> this point and is no longer helpful.
>
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 1:55 PM, Greg wrote:
> For example, I would love to see some portion of Clojure run on a platform
> that has much faster boot times so I can use Clojure for one-off shell
> scripts.
>
>
> I've mentioned this before, but I can't help myself as I see lots of people
> who wan
On 30 Giu, 18:35, Phil Hagelberg wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 9:27 AM, Phil Hagelberg wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 12:24 AM, Alessio Stalla
> > wrote:
> >> That doesn't mean that a one-
> >> click-install for a Lisp with an IDE and some popular libraries
> >> preinstalled wouldn't be
> For example, I would love to see some portion of Clojure run on a platform
> that has much faster boot times so I can use Clojure for one-off shell
> scripts.
I've mentioned this before, but I can't help myself as I see lots of people who
want to use Clojure for scripting but complain about i
Well said Phil. I would like to volunteer to help. It just so happen
that I have some time to help work on a solution. I am going to take
a few days to do some research before starting. Any help that the
clojure community can give me would gladly be apreciated
Robert
On Jun 30, 12:35 pm, Phil
> Javascript is a nice thought too.
I haven't tried it but there is a library for generating javascript
from clojure forms...
http://github.com/arohner/scriptjure#readme
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send ema
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 6:42 PM, cageface wrote:
>
> To put it more bluntly - the day that clojure no longer interoperates
> smoothly with java is the day it becomes useless to me. I'm all for
> hiding the guts from beginners but it's going to be a good long while
> before you can actually get an
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 1:42 PM, cageface wrote:
> I don't know what the implementation plans are exactly for clojure-in-
> clojure but abandoning the JVM would be extremely unwise.
Clojure-in-Clojure isn't about abandoning the JVM. It's about implementing
more of Clojure in itself. This has se
On Jun 30, 10:17 am, Sean Allen wrote:
> The larger the clojure community gets, the more you should be prepared
> for those dogs then.
To put it more bluntly - the day that clojure no longer interoperates
smoothly with java is the day it becomes useless to me. I'm all for
hiding the guts from beg
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 12:56 PM, cageface wrote:
> On Jun 29, 10:50 pm, Sean Allen wrote:
>> So those who left Java behind years ago but like Lisps in general and Clojure
>> in particular and want to minimize their contact with Java, where do
>> they fit in your view?
>> Enemies of the proper us
On Jun 29, 10:50 pm, Sean Allen wrote:
> So those who left Java behind years ago but like Lisps in general and Clojure
> in particular and want to minimize their contact with Java, where do
> they fit in your view?
> Enemies of the proper use of Clojure? Destroyers of the future?
Dogs barking up
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 9:27 AM, Phil Hagelberg wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 12:24 AM, Alessio Stalla
> wrote:
>> That doesn't mean that a one-
>> click-install for a Lisp with an IDE and some popular libraries
>> preinstalled wouldn't be useful - it would be great! But who is going
>> to mai
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 12:24 AM, Alessio Stalla
wrote:
> That doesn't mean that a one-
> click-install for a Lisp with an IDE and some popular libraries
> preinstalled wouldn't be useful - it would be great! But who is going
> to maintain it? If you pay me well enough, I'll do it, I promise :)
>
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 4:35 AM, Greg wrote:
>
> As far as I understand, Clojure will be able to interop with Java even when
> Clojure-in-Clojure happens, so there's nothing to worry about.
>
> I'm quite excited about Clojure-in-Clojure. The possibilities that will
> offer are awesome. I'm lookin
On Jun 30, 2010, at 4:09 AM, Paul Moore wrote:
Based on this comment, maybe I could ask an alternative question - can
you suggest where I should go to read some tutorials which would give
me a fast start on "just enough" Java infrastructure to get
comfortable in Clojure? Most of the Java tutori
On 29 June 2010 23:31, Sean Corfield wrote:
> FWIW, I blogged a short step-by-step post on getting up and running
> with Leiningen to show some Clojure at the repl, run as a script and
> compiled to a JAR and run via java:
>
> http://corfield.org/blog/post.cfm/getting-started-with-clojure
>
> Bear
On 30 June 2010 04:02, Jason Smith wrote:
> So I'll say it again, it's just not that simple. Unless you already
> know Java, and the only learning curve you face is the new features in
> Clojure. Then it's not bad. But it does give you new ways to cut your
> foot off more quickly. :-)
An intere
On Jun 30, 5:19 am, Michael Richter wrote:
> On 30 June 2010 11:15, cageface wrote:
>
> > On Jun 29, 6:25 pm, Michael Richter wrote:
> > > Are you *trying* to evoke the "Smug Lisp Weenie" vibe, cageface, or is
> > this
> > > just a natural byproduct of being a burgeoning Smug Clojure Weenie?
>
>
>
> Tying the fortunes of Clojure to Java was a brilliant move and one
> that I've advocated for years but the trend I've seen lately to try to
> paper over the Java underpinnings of the language worries me, as does
> talk of making Clojure-in-Clojure. There's a small but viable market
> for people
> Tying the fortunes of Clojure to Java was a brilliant move and one
> that I've advocated for years but the trend I've seen lately to try to
> paper over the Java underpinnings of the language worries me, as does
> talk of making Clojure-in-Clojure. There's a small but viable market
> for people d
On Jun 29, 8:17 pm, Michael Richter wrote:
> A good salesman also doesn't come across as smugly self-satisfied and
> projecting a sense of superiority.
I did a moderate amount of CL hacking in 2003-4 and I've been dipping
my toes back in lately with Clojure but I hardly count as a "lisp
weenie".
Hi,
2010/6/30 Michał Marczyk :
> [...]
> Then again, given that CCW has paredit built-in, I'm not going to
> claim Emacs is likely to be much better. (I actually find it simpler,
> but if the students in question have Java classes ahead of them / in
> parallel, they'll likely need an IDE anyway, s
Hi,
On Jun 30, 3:25 am, Michael Richter wrote:
> I swear, step by step Clojure is falling into the Common Lisp death spiral.
> As usual, too, it's the community at fault, not the creator.
Please keep the church in the town. The Clojure community is one of
the best and friendliest I had ever th
On Tue, 29 Jun 2010 20:02:14 -0700 (PDT)
Jason Smith wrote:
> If you want to get the length of a String in Clojure, you have to read
> JavaDoc.
Huh?
bhuda% clj
Clojure 1.1.0
user=> (count "abcd")
4
user=> (count "ab")
2
user=>
If that's your view of clojure, no wonder you think it can't be us
On Jun 29, 2010, at 11:02 PM, Jason Smith wrote:
> If you want to get the length of a String in Clojure, you have to read
> JavaDoc.
user=> (count "abc")
3
user=> (doc count)
-
clojure.core/count
([coll])
Returns the number of items in the collection. (count nil) retu
...and interfertilisation will bring us all Great Good.
M.
--
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
fir
On 30 June 2010 05:02, Jason Smith wrote:
> So look, I think the actual CompSci guys (looking to teach) are asking
> for simplicity, and the Java guys are saying it's not that simple.
I think both sides have points valid *within the context in which they operate*.
> If you want to get the length
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 11:04 PM, cageface wrote:
> A language advocate is a salesman. A good salesman knows his product
> and his audience. Many here seem to have some extremely naive ideas
> about this. Push Clojure as a Python/Ruby/blub replacement and you'll
> get a inbox full of this kind of
Let's rephrase this slightly. I completely agree with the spirit of
this article:
http://programmingzen.com/2008/10/26/what-arc-should-learn-from-ruby/
i.e. - That the tipping point for any language into wide use occurs
when it makes it significantly easier to solve a common, but painful
problem.
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 11:02 PM, Jason Smith wrote:
> One of the great strengths of Clojure, and what is going to make it
> hard for students who aren't already comfortable with Java, is that it
> not only integrates with Java, it depends on that integration. So you
> have to know a lot about J
On 30 June 2010 11:15, cageface wrote:
> On Jun 29, 6:25 pm, Michael Richter wrote:
> > Are you *trying* to evoke the "Smug Lisp Weenie" vibe, cageface, or is
> this
> > just a natural byproduct of being a burgeoning Smug Clojure Weenie?
>
> How many times do I have to say I'm in favor of maki
On 30 June 2010 11:04, cageface wrote:
> A language advocate is a salesman. A good salesman knows his product
> and his audience.
A good salesman also doesn't come across as smugly self-satisfied and
projecting a sense of superiority.
Maybe you need a job in sales for a while.
--
"Perhaps pe
On Jun 29, 6:25 pm, Michael Richter wrote:
> Are you *trying* to evoke the "Smug Lisp Weenie" vibe, cageface, or is this
> just a natural byproduct of being a burgeoning Smug Clojure Weenie?
How many times do I have to say I'm in favor of making things as easy
as possible for beginners before I'm
On Jun 29, 7:24 pm, Chas Emerick wrote:
> More talking up the complexity of Clojure, to its detriment. Stop
> it. Familiarity is not a metric that anyone is aiming at, least of
> all the language principals -- capability in various axes is, and
> that's what's attracting people from all si
So look, I think the actual CompSci guys (looking to teach) are asking
for simplicity, and the Java guys are saying it's not that simple.
>From my perspective, I am steeped in Java, and I am looking for new
tools for my toolbelt. I can work with Eclipse or NetBeans, and I can
roll Clojure into exi
>
>
> I swear, step by step Clojure is falling into the Common Lisp death spiral.
> As usual, too, it's the community at fault, not the creator.
>
> Are you *trying* to evoke the "Smug Lisp Weenie" vibe, cageface, or is
> this just a natural byproduct of being a burgeoning Smug Clojure Weenie?
>
On Jun 29, 2010, at 6:30 PM, cageface wrote:
On Jun 29, 1:22 pm, Chas Emerick wrote:
Any talk about how Clojure might be "too much" for some, for whatever
reason, is out of bounds IMO. Clojure, as a language, is *simpler*
than just about all of the popular alternatives out there, and the
lan
I want to take your class! :-D
BTW, just one more nudge for IntelliJ. I don't know if you noticed this as
well, but another thing that made me a real fan of it is its startup time
compared to NetBeans and Eclipse. Is it me or is it a *lot* faster?
On Jun 29, 2010, at 8:58 PM, Lee Spector wrote:
We're safely into the weeds now. I'm of two minds about continuing to
participate in the thread since it's gone so far off the tracks, but
here goes.
No language changes have been suggested or discussed -- everything's
been in the realm of tooling, documentation, release process, etc. etc.
On 30 June 2010 03:29, Lee Spector wrote:
> I hadn't seen that and it's cute, but I also meant menus etc., which work for
> people coming from any platform without learning key commands etc. The IDEs
> seem to have this, as do the environments that have been mentioned for
> beginners in other l
On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 02:34:31 +0200
Michał Marczyk wrote:
> On 29 June 2010 06:14, Michael Richter wrote:
> > Ah. The Clojure community has already started down the road to Common
> > Lisp-style, smugness-generated obscurity and disdain. Bravo! Well-played!
> Not at all. While we're discussing
On Jun 29, 2010, at 9:10 PM, Michał Marczyk wrote:
> On 30 June 2010 02:58, Lee Spector wrote:
>> But an editor that obeys OS-standard-ish interface conventions [etc.]
>
> Would CuaMode [1] help?
I hadn't seen that and it's cute, but I also meant menus etc., which work for
people coming from
On 30 June 2010 06:33, cageface wrote:
> On Jun 29, 12:54 pm, Chas Emerick wrote:
> > Indeed, there are many nontrivial personas that actively wish for a
> > smaller (or at least not maximally large), more exclusive community.
>
> Only a fool would actively wish for a smaller community. Some of
> I still have to re-evaluate the current versions of the IDEs to decide which
> to use in the fall, and if the recent past is prologue they may get even
> better before the semester starts.
Just want to point out that intellij's la clojure plugin works just fine with
the free opensource commun
On 30 June 2010 02:58, Lee Spector wrote:
> But an editor that obeys OS-standard-ish interface conventions (with at least
> minimal language-awareness re: paren-matching & indentation), and that
> doesn't require any special attention, would quite a bit better.
Would CuaMode [1] help?
> [...]
On Jun 29, 2010, at 8:19 PM, Michał Marczyk wrote:
> I think that an Edwin-like experience with Emacs would be perfectly
> fine for newcomers to programming. [etc.]
>
> You could even spend some time (or have your TAs spend it) on a Q&A
> session to address any Emacs configuration issues after,
On 29 June 2010 06:14, Michael Richter wrote:
> Ah. The Clojure community has already started down the road to Common
> Lisp-style, smugness-generated obscurity and disdain. Bravo! Well-played!
Not at all. While we're discussing general beliefs regarding the
possible target audience for Clojur
On 29 June 2010 17:15, Lee Spector wrote:
> Well I had trouble with this and I think I posted about it and that others
> did too. But in any event emacs isn't what I'm looking for.
Just throwing out an opinion:
I think that an Edwin-like experience with Emacs would be perfectly
fine for newcome
On 29 June 2010 23:03, Brian Hurt wrote:
> No. This discussion is/was about (non-specific) changes being proposed to
> Clojure.
Care to quote any message from this thread where any changes to
Clojure were being proposed...? I have to say I cannot find one.
I will take this opportunity to note t
On Jun 29, 12:54 pm, Chas Emerick wrote:
> Indeed, there are many nontrivial personas that actively wish for a
> smaller (or at least not maximally large), more exclusive community.
Only a fool would actively wish for a smaller community. Some of just
recognize that selling a sports car to gr
FWIW, I blogged a short step-by-step post on getting up and running
with Leiningen to show some Clojure at the repl, run as a script and
compiled to a JAR and run via java:
http://corfield.org/blog/post.cfm/getting-started-with-clojure
Bear in mind my blog audience is folks with some familiarity
On Jun 29, 1:22 pm, Chas Emerick wrote:
> Any talk about how Clojure might be "too much" for some, for whatever
> reason, is out of bounds IMO. Clojure, as a language, is *simpler*
> than just about all of the popular alternatives out there, and the
> language is eminently approachable and
Greg -- this was *really* helpful. Answered a lot of questions that I had and I
see that IntelliJ has a lot of nice features (and some non-obvious setup steps,
but now I think I'll be able to get a handle on them).
Thanks, -Lee
On Jun 29, 2010, at 4:40 PM, Greg wrote:
> Hey Lee,
>
> I made a
Hey Lee,
I made a quick getting started video for IntelliJ and La Clojure that covers
all the steps:
http://gregslepak.posterous.com/clojure-development-with-intellijs-la-clojure
Hope it's helpful!
- Greg
On Jun 29, 2010, at 8:28 AM, Lee Spector wrote:
>
> On Jun 28, 2010, at 5:31 PM, Greg
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 4:22 PM, Chas Emerick wrote:
>
> The discussion about newcomers is *not* about what one needs to know or
> should know in order to build über-complicated applications for deployment
> in "production" -- it's about what the learning curve looks and feels like
> to various c
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 8:14 PM, Greg wrote:
> Just because you found it easy to get started, does not mean others do, and
> judging from the reaction to my post, I'm by no means the only person to feel
> this way.
>
> You went to a bootcamp to learn clojure, you found some Clojure-MacOSX
> pac
> So I wonder how much making the first few baby steps easier is really
> going to help the uptake of Clojure. I have to imagine that the kind
> of person that can't figure out a CLASSPATH is going to have his head
> explode when he has to figure out how to restructure all his
> iterations in ter
First, just to gather a gestalt here (names elided as I'm not trying
to single anyone out):
On Jun 28, 2010, at 10:54 PM, XXX wrote:
If you are going to go to all the trouble to work with Clojure, you
might as well be exposed to the reality of a semi-production Clojure
project. Put the water
On Jun 28, 2010, at 8:30 PM, Greg wrote:
- Clojure (and some environment for working with it) must be as
"friendly" and approachable for new users as possible. It is not
an "expert's" or "professional's" language, at least in my
conception, and thinking of it that way will doom it to
ir
Yes, CCW has automatic indentation at this point.
- Chas
On Jun 29, 2010, at 9:32 AM, Lee Spector wrote:
Thanks Laurent.
Is there automatic Clojure indentation in Counterclockwise now?
I played with it a couple of months ago and saw a lot to like, and
if I recall correctly a lack of inden
Laurent,
It definitely sounds like I should try the newest version, and I will. Thanks!!
-Lee
On Jun 29, 2010, at 2:41 PM, Laurent PETIT wrote:
>
> There's now auto-indentation (when you hit the Enter key). What is
> still missing is "bulk" reindentation (whole file at once).
>
> There's al
On Jun 29, 2010, at 2:32 PM, Sean Corfield wrote:
> I believe this is what I ultimately ended up installing on my Macs:
>
> http://github.com/carlism/Clojure-MacOSX
Thanks... but wasn't this package declared to be obsoleted by clj? Or was that
something else? In any event I note that there are
Hi Lee,
2010/6/29 Lee Spector :
>
> Thanks Laurent.
>
> Is there automatic Clojure indentation in Counterclockwise now?
There's now auto-indentation (when you hit the Enter key). What is
still missing is "bulk" reindentation (whole file at once).
There's also a "paredit-like" mode. I've called i
I believe this is what I ultimately ended up installing on my Macs:
http://github.com/carlism/Clojure-MacOSX
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 8:54 PM, Lee Spector wrote:
> What TextMate clojure bundle & instructions do you use? I've tried to play
> with this but the installations haven't worked as adver
On Tue, 29 Jun 2010 11:15:40 -0400
Lee Spector wrote:
>
> On Jun 29, 2010, at 10:26 AM, Mike Meyer wrote:
> > Actually, have you looked at jedit? It's the only free Java editor
> > that isn't trying to be an IDE.
>
> Thanks for this tip. I didn't know about jedit. I've grabbed it and see that
On Jun 29, 2010, at 10:26 AM, Mike Meyer wrote:
> Actually, have you looked at jedit? It's the only free Java editor
> that isn't trying to be an IDE.
Thanks for this tip. I didn't know about jedit. I've grabbed it and see that it
has a built-in Clojure mode. Promising! Its idea of proper Clojur
On Tue, 29 Jun 2010 07:56:09 -0400
Lee Spector wrote:
>
> On Jun 29, 2010, at 1:05 AM, Mike Meyer wrote:
> >> Yes emacs has built-in paren matching but emacs (like vi) is something
> >> that has to be learned, not all newcomers will know it, I don't want
> >> to force my students to use it (alth
Thanks Laurent.
Is there automatic Clojure indentation in Counterclockwise now?
I played with it a couple of months ago and saw a lot to like, and if I recall
correctly a lack of indentation support was one of the main reasons I kept
looking for alternatives. I think I was also a little confus
"Tim Robinson" wrote:
>* Most n00bs want a "hello world" in an application output (via script
>or compojure). Not in a repl. The repl is a tool to get you there. In
>order to do this users should really have a 7 step guide on leinington
I happen to think that they're wanting the wrong thing. Eve
The video must be seen in HD if you want to have a chance to see
anything on it. It has no sound, it's not a problem with your
computer.
2010/6/29 Laurent PETIT :
> Ok, so now, please take a look at this video (it's just 3 minutes),
> and you'll get a grasp at how easy it is to bootstrap an Eclips
Ok, so now, please take a look at this video (it's just 3 minutes),
and you'll get a grasp at how easy it is to bootstrap an Eclipse based
clojure environment : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1T0ZjBMIQS8
Works with eclipse 3.5 and eclipse 3.6.
I'm not claiming Eclipse / counterclockwise is better
On Jun 28, 2010, at 5:31 PM, Greg wrote:
> Have you tried IntelliJ with the La Clojure plugin? I tried all 3 IDEs and I
> was most impressed with IntelliJ IDEA. It's not too difficult to setup, and
> once you do it's really nice and has I think all of the stuff you asked about
> (syntax colorin
On Jun 29, 5:50 am, Sean Corfield wrote:
> If folks find the Java stack intimidating, maybe Clojure isn't for
> them? Lots of language run on the JVM and they all require some basic
> knowledge of classpaths, build tools and existing IDEs such as
> Ecliper, NetBeans, IntelliJ etc. If folks are new
2010/6/29 Jared :
> I guess I'll throw in my 2 cents, since I'm a new guy with very
> limited Java experience.
>
> It is tricky getting Clojure to run, but not all of this is Clojure's
> fault. It took me 2 days to get it running on my desktop running
> ubuntu 10.04, with netbeans. I still have not
On Jun 29, 2010, at 1:05 AM, Mike Meyer wrote:
>> Yes emacs has built-in paren matching but emacs (like vi) is something
>> that has to be learned, not all newcomers will know it, I don't want
>> to force my students to use it (although I use it)
>
> But you're willing to force them to use some o
On 29 June 2010 06:11, cageface wrote:
> On Jun 28, 9:14 pm, Michael Richter wrote:
>> Ah. The Clojure community has already started down the road to Common
>> Lisp-style, smugness-generated obscurity and disdain. Bravo! Well-played!
>
> Not at all. Nothing would make me happier than "Clojure
Very insightful comments Chas!
I agree with most of what you've said, in the sense that I definitely see your
point of view.
On Jun 28, 2010, at 7:17 PM, Chas Emerick wrote:
> Greg, thanks for this post, it's a helpful perspective. Many of us have been
> working on this problem from various a
I guess I'll throw in my 2 cents, since I'm a new guy with very
limited Java experience.
It is tricky getting Clojure to run, but not all of this is Clojure's
fault. It took me 2 days to get it running on my desktop running
ubuntu 10.04, with netbeans. I still have not been able to get the
labrepl
On 28 June 2010 22:41, cageface wrote:
> On Jun 28, 12:16 pm, Martin DeMello wrote:
>> It depends. I found the concepts pretty easy, since I have done a lot
>> of functional programming, but when I was new to clojure I had a truly
>> horrible time figuring out the various classpath issues needed
On 28 June 2010 23:13, Lee Spector wrote:
> and more recently I had to figure out about.dotted.names and their meaning
> with respect to directory structures,
> in order to get require to find a second clj file. It's not complicated, but
> it's also not obvious to everyone first coming
> to Cloj
Being a n00b, 1 year programming, not formally educated in such, 2
weeks with Clojure
I am going to agree. Clojure is NOT n00b friendly. The easiest setup I
have ever seen dealt with is python.
* Most n00bs want a "hello world" in an application output (via script
or compojure). Not in a repl. The
On Jun 28, 2010, at 4:44 PM, Lee Spectorr wrote:
> CLJ might indeed be handy but an editor is essential, and neither this nor
> the other options mentioned in the CLJ readme includes one as far as I know.
> My minimal requirements for an editor are that it have a interface that will
> be natura
On 28 June 2010 19:49, Mike Meyer
wrote:
>> Yet another set of choices n00bs are faced with is figuring out how
>> to actually compile their source into an executable.
>
> Executable? We're talking about Java here. It doesn't do executables -
> it does jar files. There's little reason to build tho
Sean,
There are many ways in which one could have the point of view that getting
started with Clojure is simple.
As I tried to illustrate in the post, there exist other points of view from
which this is not true.
Just because you found it easy to get started, does not mean others do, and
judg
> A certain proportion of new clojure users are coming from
> non-Java/non-JVM backgrounds. To them, "how do I make an executable"
> is a perfectly valid question. And "clojure doesn't do executables"
> isn't a particularly encouraging answer (not even if you blame Java
> for it :-)) Classpaths, se
Full disclosure, I never liked ruby or python, I'm more of a perl/c++/
R guy.
I'm new to clojure as well, and love it. I don't mind learning LISP at
all. I find it refreshing. It takes the bureaucracy out of Java.
When I can, I explore ways in which incanter, cascalog, hadoop,
mahout, weka, and
Mike Meyer wrote:
"cageface" wrote:
The problem is that actually getting anything
done with Common Lisp is a nightmare.
Really? Axiom was one of the three largest commercial computer
algebra systems (alongside Mathematica and Maple). It contains
about 1 million "things of code" ("lines o
Nothing about lisp is particularly difficult.
Pandoric macros, closures, continuations,
reader tables, circular structures, lexical
vs dynamic scoping, indefinite lifetimes,
quasiquoted expressions, or any of the other
simple ideas.
They are, of course, only simple once you "get it".
Like everyt
Daniel,
I think you're missing my point or I may have not said it correctly.
You can use clojure to teach basic programming concepts but that has
already been done in other languages and thats why we don't really see
that work or discussion being done with clojure. You cannot say
teaching the adva
1 - 100 of 160 matches
Mail list logo
