6 ms·

Clojure 1.9: Spec. Clojure 1.10: datafy/nav + tap> which has spawned a whole new set of tooling for exploring data. Clojure 1.11: portable math (clojure.math,

Clojure 1.9: Spec. Clojure 1.10: datafy/nav + tap> which has spawned a whole new set of tooling for exploring data. Clojure 1.11: portable math (clojure.math, which also works on ClojureScript). Clojure 1.12: huge improvements in Java interop. And, yes, the new CLI and deps.edn, and tools.build to support "builds as programs".

whalesalad 5mo ago
Things have surely happened and the language has improved, but would you consider any of this to be innovative?
- jwr 5mo ago
  Hmm. I'm not sure what you are looking for — myself, I write software that supports my living, and I'm not looking for thrills. What I get with Clojure is new concepts every couple of years or so, thought through and carefully implemented by people much smarter than me, in a way that doesn't break anything. This lets me concentrate on my work and deliver said software that supports my living. And pay the bills.
- waffletower 5mo ago
  Babashka is definitely innovative and useful
  - whalesalad 5mo ago
    Agreed, that is huge for the ecosystem. I have a side project actually that has a unified codebase: central library and api server in clj, and the cli client is babashka.
- iLemming 5mo ago
  > would you consider any of this to be innovative? JS got optional chaining, nullish coalescing, async/await, decorators, pattern matching proposals - all borrowed from other languages. Python got type hints (borrowed), structural pattern matching (borrowed from ML/Haskell), walrus operator. Rust got async/await (borrowed). Go got generics (very late, borrowed from everywhere). Almost every "feature addition" in any mainstream language since roughly 2010 is a synthesis or import from prior art - usually from ML, Haskell, Lisp, or Smalltalk lineages. Comparatively, there's been quite some good amount of innovation in Clojure-sphere. Anyone who ever tried Hyperfiddle/electric, generated tests based on Specs or Malli, or even used nbb for scripting - knows that. So let's either apply pressure everywhere equally, or nowhere. What's your point of singling out Clojure? Are you asking for a higher standard being applied because of Clojure's stated philosophy (simplicity and careful design, etc.), or this is a proxy complaint about something else?
vaylian 5mo ago
And we can look forward to Jank https://jank-lang.org/ https://jank-lang.org/
- pjmlp 5mo ago
  Yes, although if one cares about Jank, they can also use a traditional Common Lisp or Scheme compiler, if compatibility with existing Clojure code isn't a requirement.

whalesalad 5mo ago

Things have surely happened and the language has improved, but would you consider any of this to be innovative?

jwr 5mo ago
Hmm. I'm not sure what you are looking for — myself, I write software that supports my living, and I'm not looking for thrills. What I get with Clojure is new concepts every couple of years or so, thought through and carefully implemented by people much smarter than me, in a way that doesn't break anything. This lets me concentrate on my work and deliver said software that supports my living. And pay the bills.
waffletower 5mo ago
Babashka is definitely innovative and useful
- whalesalad 5mo ago
  Agreed, that is huge for the ecosystem. I have a side project actually that has a unified codebase: central library and api server in clj, and the cli client is babashka.
iLemming 5mo ago
> would you consider any of this to be innovative? JS got optional chaining, nullish coalescing, async/await, decorators, pattern matching proposals - all borrowed from other languages. Python got type hints (borrowed), structural pattern matching (borrowed from ML/Haskell), walrus operator. Rust got async/await (borrowed). Go got generics (very late, borrowed from everywhere). Almost every "feature addition" in any mainstream language since roughly 2010 is a synthesis or import from prior art - usually from ML, Haskell, Lisp, or Smalltalk lineages. Comparatively, there's been quite some good amount of innovation in Clojure-sphere. Anyone who ever tried Hyperfiddle/electric, generated tests based on Specs or Malli, or even used nbb for scripting - knows that. So let's either apply pressure everywhere equally, or nowhere. What's your point of singling out Clojure? Are you asking for a higher standard being applied because of Clojure's stated philosophy (simplicity and careful design, etc.), or this is a proxy complaint about something else?

vaylian 5mo ago

And we can look forward to Jank https://jank-lang.org/ https://jank-lang.org/

pjmlp 5mo ago
Yes, although if one cares about Jank, they can also use a traditional Common Lisp or Scheme compiler, if compatibility with existing Clojure code isn't a requirement.