zlacker

[parent] [thread] 3 comments
1. a2code+(OP)[view] [source] 2025-12-15 10:45:28
I have two tech q about partsbox. Why Clojure? Why not CL (lack of saas related-features)?
replies(1): >>jwr+G1
2. jwr+G1[view] [source] 2025-12-15 11:00:26
>>a2code+(OP)
Clojure is just better than CL in pretty much every respect. Excellent and well designed standard library, great concurrency primitives, core.async, built-in transducers (CL has SERIES which does a kind-of similar thing, but isn't as well designed and integrated) and the dominant immutability all let me write more maintainable code. Also, I can re-use model code on the client side (ClojureScript), so there is lots of code sharing, and I don't have to serialize to a crippled format (JSON), my data can pass from server to client and back intact (with sets, keywords, and other rich data types).

I used to love CL and wrote quite a bit of code in it, but since Clojure came along I can't really see any reason to go back.

replies(1): >>a2code+m7
◧◩
3. a2code+m7[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-12-15 11:44:36
>>jwr+G1
I did not try Clojure so I cannot comment on how well implemented the features you quote are, when compared to CL. All I can say is that CL also provides much of the same functionality with its standard, cl-async, lparallel, parenscript, while (im)mutability is a matter of preference (IMO correct decision by CL) rather than dominance. The way I see it, is that CL is superior (opinion) due to reader macros and native compilation, rather than bytecode JVM.
replies(1): >>jwr+qr1
◧◩◪
4. jwr+qr1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-12-15 18:24:27
>>a2code+m7
I used CL for many years before I switched to Clojure. And by "used" I mean really used it, not just for applications, but I also dove into CL implementations, for example I added return-from-frame (also known as debug-return) to CMUCL.

So, I kind of know what I'm talking about :-) And I don't miss anything from CL: I honestly can't find a single reason to switch back to CL.

[go to top]