Re: Road to Clojure Survey

On Feb 21, 1:16 pm, du...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Feb 21, 6:43 am, Rich Hickey <richhic...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:



On Feb 21, 6:57 am, Pascal Costanza <p...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Helmut Eller wrote:
* Vend [2009-02-20 22:26+0100] writes:

FSet is a library, not a language.
If I understand correctly, native immutable collections are just one
feature of Clojure, and it integrates well with other features
(polymorphic collection manipulation and concurrency control).

I'm confused by this whole discussion.

Aren't Clojure's collection classes just a library and the Clojure
compiler/language treats them just like any other Java class? Is there
a reason why those classes could not be used in normal Java programs?

They can be used in Java, but you have to adapt your programming style.
Existing Java code will not just automagically work with them in the
general case.

This is FUD - please stop spreading it.

Pascal is not likely to wave his own flag, but I don't think you
realize whom you are talking to. Pascal was a Java programmer long
before he switched to Common Lisp, and his first writings on Common
Lisp (http://p-cos.net/lisp/guide.html) provide some of his
background. However, even if you look up his credentials and are not
impressed, at least realize what you yourself are doing; you are
posting in a Lisp newsgroup arguing with someone who has switched his
major emphasis from Java to Lisp, and so cries of FUD are going to
fall on deaf ears and numb them to other things you have to say.


I do know Pascal. We've met several times and had some great
discussions. I respect both him and his work. I know Pascal's opinions
are well regarded here, all the more reason for them to be accurate. I
too came to Lisp from C++/Java/C#, and greatly value the areas in
which it is superior. But his statement above is simply wrong. It is
not a matter of qualifications or opinion. If you have existing Java
code that takes a collection and does not mutate it you can pass a
Clojure collection and it will work without change or adaptation, i.e.
"automagically". There is a large body of Java code for which this is
true, and people are leveraging that capability every day.

Clojure has been out for over a year and I have never come here to
evangelize it. Now it is being discussed by others, and some
inaccurate things have been said. I'm just trying to keep the
discussion accurate, and have no aspirations of convincing anyone here
of anything.

Rich
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Road to Clojure Survey
    ... The list of arguments that speak against the JVM and favour a CL ... A typical problem in the Java world, for example, is that you have to address different incompatible versions of Java itself. ... But how would it help here if Clojure were done in CL? ... you're making the assumption that the situation with regard to libraries in Common Lisp is much worse than it actually is. ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: Making Lisp popular - can it be done?
    ... Lisp conference/meeting. ... My Clojure program took around 105 msecs and the Java code did the job ... I have seen the JVM outperforming two different native Lisp compilers. ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: Road to Clojure Survey
    ... The Java platform. ... the Java world by those hoards of Java programmers, ... Isn't it also a Lisp with Java-interop (like ... And here comes Clojure -- the same weird syntax and parens, ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: Reinventing the iterator - Clojure
    ... I can just as easily use common lisp as the main language and then ... This argument works against clojure, ... But still most Lisp compilers can't always beat Java or even C. ... So, even if a number crunching problem would be important, then one ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: Making Lisp popular - can it be done?
    ... Common Lisp could do the same as well in principle, ... to Java libraries. ... tons of libs available in the JVM (I think more than for anything ... can mix Clojure code with pure Java which can compete with and often ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)