Clojure makes me RAGE

Rich Hickey^† is a disgusting turd. His very existence is an insult to the legacy of Lisp, the genius of McCarthy, and all the hard work that Lispers have put in over the years. The fact that Clojure runs on the JVM^¥ is trivial compared to its other mortal sins, which are so numerous (and make me so angry) that I can't even describe half of them.

Shall I start with the munging-together of value and function names? In a proper Lisp you can instantly recognize head forms by the fact that they're at the head of the list. It was bad enough when Scheme made this ignorant mistake, and worse when Paul "Look at me, I don't even know what interactive development is" Graham copied it. Can't anyone learn from their errors? Oh, and by the way, Scheme tried to remedy this by having "hygienic" macros, which are also completely retarded but at least manage to make it usable. Clojure doesn't even have that. It's completely laughable.

It's not even as if that's the worst part. Not that I need to say it: There's too much syntax! I think Haskell must be Hickey's role model here, since I've never seen another language with as much syntax as Haskell ever in my life. And in Clojure, we get what is easily the most syntax-heavy Lisp-like (it's certainly nothing like Lisp except in the most superficial respects) that has ever been seen. All manner of things that could very easily be done in an ordinary head form style instead wind up littering brackets and delimiters all over the place, even in the simplest of functions. [foo] instead of (list foo), {:foo bar} instead of (dict :foo bar)...

Lambda. It's spelled "lambda," not "fn." Is that too much typing for you, Mr. Hickey? Is it? Did you sprain your wrists masturbating to your unwarranted self-importance? I hope they break off, Mr. Hickey, I hope they break off and you die. Because you've ruined Lisp for a lot of people. You can't even type "lambda?" Seriously? I'm not impressed.

I'm going to have some tea now. I'll be back. Later.

†_{What the fuck kind of a name is that, anyway?}
¥_{ABCL runs fine on the JVM, I hear. There's no point in making another dialect for that.}

>>40
nO. iT'S TRUE.

>>40
Why don't you go ahead and run the ANSI compliance tests, you know that almost any serious implementation comes with plenty of regression tests and compliance tests?

>>38
u monad

>>20
...instead, they got gensym.

>>44
nEWSFLASH: cL MACROS ARE MORE POWERFUL THAN SCHEME MACROS. WITH POWER, COMES RESPONSIBILITY. PG HAS EXCELLENT TEXTS FOR MACROS. i READ PG ONCE AND NEVER FORGOT THE WISE WORDS READ.

>>42
How is ANSI compliance something to be proud of? I use Unicode.

>>36
I don't know why naggers keep complaining about Haskell's syntax, Haskell is one of the cleanest looking languages out there. Yes, I realise OP is trolling.

>>47
Haskell is one of the cleanest looking languages out there.
Haskell has awful syntax lol. All the idiosyncrasies just make a bad syntax.

Haskell is the worst language in existence. Even COBOL is more elegant.

>>49
...But (I forgot to add) Clojure is pretty bad, too.

>>48,49
2/10, you're trying too hard.

ALL ABOARD THE RAGE TRAIN

>>39
Tell them, Brother. The ways of Lisp will soon run the world.

I literally lisp in my pants sometimes

>>53
I went to an all-Mac room at ILC '09

>>37
You wish. These days the free Forths are getting so many commits, ANSI compliance is excellent, code generation is pretty good, libraries are growing each day, and new users are appearing daily. For me, the ANS Forth implementations out there already provide most of the things I need, and I have no reason to use FIJI, but I don't have anything against it, since I haven't used it myself, but did see comparisons with it with other Forths, and it didn't impress me that much, maybe if I actually needed access to a large java codebase, it would be more useful for me, but I have 0 java libraries I need, and even if I needed any, there is always Misty Beach Forth.

The other point I want to make is that since FORTH's inception, there was a lot of variation between how Forth is to be implemented and what features it would have, and there was always healthy flame wars debate on the subject. It's very easy to change Forth to do what you want, and you can redefine the language to match your tastes better, which is why everyone using Forth seriously is a linguist. This is an advantage, not a problem, unlike other languages with static syntax, you can make Forth be anything you want, and of course people will bitch and moan when that doesn't match their view, but that is fine!

Now back to whatever boring language you came from >>37!

>>45
This is what common lispers actually believe!!

CRANK DAT CLOJAH BOY

60 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-27 20:09

61 Name: Anonymous 2011-02-02 23:21

62 Name: Anonymous 2011-02-03 8:20

63 Name: Anonymous 2011-07-21 6:03

>>34
Lisp all the way down is a great idea. It’s amazing that others – some would say *everyone* else – have gone away from having cdr be cdr all the way up, and supplanted the similarly elegant consistency of having “mov” and “JSR” all the way up with the jarring switch to “=” and “goto”. Fucking retards.

Please, continue your work “searching for the real Lisps” (damn OJ for trivialising that phrase) and Lisp all the way down. Who can deny the obvious sense of high-level languages compiling directly to the processor instruction set is the most correct way to design a language^Wplatform^Wfairyland^W”real” Lisp? It is just what the designers of Java (stupid, clearly ignorant of Lisp’s elegance), Smalltalk VMs (computing lightweights), MS CLR/DLR (well they never get anything right), and, well, every other language in the world including every other Lisp besides Genera.

Let us know when you’ve got something workable to talk about, as we wait with baited breath. As you said before, a multi-GHz resurrected Lisp machine descendant. I assume you’re months away from announcing, at most.

64 Name: Anonymous 2011-07-21 12:57

dual namespace is not that important.
funcall is lame. headform is not that important. ((foo)) being an error is stupid. CL people need to get their heads out their asses sometimes.

65 Name: Anonymous 2011-07-21 13:00

>>64
funcall is static typing (you explicitly point that variable is a function), so it's faster.

66 Name: Anonymous 2011-07-21 13:10

compiling Lisp
having a function type instead of just lists
people still think this is a good idea

PicoLisp is master race

67 Name: Anonymous 2011-07-21 13:23

>>66
Go the fuck back to /g/, goddamned retarded homosexual faggot.

68 Name: Anonymous 2011-07-21 14:47

>>67
you could say that about all the lispers around here

69 Name: Anonymous 2011-07-21 14:53

>>68
Everyone on the Internet is a retarded homosexual faggot. It can't be helped.

70 Name: Anonymous 2011-07-21 14:55

>>69
I'm not retarded.  I am, however, a homosexual faggot, so prepare your anus now, boy ;>

71 Name: Anonymous 2011-07-21 19:42

I studied FIOC in my spare time and learnt procedural programming half assedly. It actually took me several years to learn how to write code that wouldn't make me puke afterwards. Regardless, I entered ``College'' and they taught us... Python. Just my luck.
Then they shoved us Java down our throats and had to pick a random book to make heads or tails of their class based-OO and static typing. I threw too much time out of the window in the Portland Patterns Repository, which could have been better spent reading SICP if I had known of it... but at least I learnt that design patterns are a disease of the mind.
Then I started reading SICP and my mom got scared, and said, 'you're movin' with your auntie and uncle in bel-air.' I whistled for a cab and when it came near, the license plate said fresh and it had dice in the mirror. If anything, I could say that this cab was rare, but I thought, 'Nah, forget it. Yo, holmes to bel-air' I pulled up to the house about 7 or 8 and I yelled to the cabbie, 'yo homes smell ya later' Looked at my kingdom I was finally there, to sit on my throne as the prince of bel-air.

72 Name: Anonymous 2011-07-21 20:05

>>71
[m][o][u]^/polecat[u][/o] _kebabs/[/m]

73 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-04 17:33

I've been looking at the Clojure docs, and I can't quite understand the hate it's getting around the web. The language seems to really do what it claims: take Lisp to the 21st century, fixing several of my pet peeves in CL, and also introducing several new good ideas, such as data structures with actually usable but still lispy syntax, and a sane model for parallel programming.

The thought of running on `JVM' and openly embracing the world of `Java' crap is making me kind of sad, though.

74 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-04 17:43

>>73
Most of the hate I've seen comes either from web developers or Lisp weeniespurists. I've yet to see a really good argument against it. I have some personal reasons for not using it, JVM is somewhere near the end of that list.

75 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-05 0:33

CLOJURE IS DICK

76 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-05 1:59

I think you're making the assumption that Clojure's "syntax" is sugar, and not deep. '[a b c] is ['a 'b 'c], not '(vector a b c) or some nonsense. The only bit of syntax that is actually reader-level is the #() form for lambdas, which I honestly love to bits.

And, since all of Clojure's data structures are immutable, you can use them at the macro level just fine. It's occasionally very useful and makes a lot of conceptual sense: not everything is head form. For instance, function arguments (the car is not special, so a list data structure doesn't make a lot of intrinsic sense like it does for a function-call.)

As far as namespace whining: Clojure is not CL nor is it Scheme -- it's opinionated and has a VERY idiomatic style, like most modern scripting languages. It's not your everything, and it's only good for making small DSLs, not big ones. It already is a DSL for Java for managing state intelligently and transforming persistent data structures.

77 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-05 3:50

fuck off and die you cock sucking faggot, >>1

Lisp is shit because it doesn't have syntax. And Scheme's Lisp-1ness is probably the only thing it's got over CL.

78 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-05 4:16

>>27
You can use the entire Java Library with ABCL and any other external libraries.

This is the it runs on the JVM you moron.

You think people take the time to port to the JVM just to run slower and still have a small library?

79 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-05 4:52

It already is a DSL for Java
And Java is a DSL for turning XML documents into stack traces.

80 Name: Anonymous 2012-09-03 2:59

>>1
[foo] instead of (list foo)
Fuck you, that's a great shorthand.

---

Newer Posts

---

Don't change these.

Name:		Email:
Entire Thread Thread List

All trademarks and copyrights on this site are owned by their respective parties. All comments and posts are the responsibility of their own posters.
- Tinychan + 2ch Mode -