The misconception list basically summarizes the interactions I have with people who know I use Clojure. It's really interesting that these are still around, especially considering that lisp hasn't been new for a long time.
As an aside, I loved the chrono trigger reference! I was actually listening to some of its music as I viewed the slides.
I know this is old hat for the FP community, but it's worth mentioning that the dot product would be normally be written as (reduce + (map * xs ys)) (or something similar) for the sake of readers scared by the loop acc pattern.
It's really interesting that these are still around, especially considering that lisp hasn't been new for a long time.
People want to believe the world is simple, and that learning one PL is enough. Once you know Java, why learn another one? Either they're all the same, or they're so radically different they must be weak in some critical way.
When you grok Lisp, and realize that it is actually practical, you realize that you've only scratched the surface of the PL problem... and that's scary for a lot of people, especially as there's a tendency to overestimate the barriers between languages. (The Internet runs on components written on all sorts of different languages.)
it's worth mentioning that the dot product would be normally be written as (reduce + (map xs ys))*
Yes, I had that thought, too.
In fact, that formulation is too slow for, say, large-scale ML. I've been getting a lot of mileage out of Prismatic's hiphip library... and I really look forward to, about 5 years from now, when Clojure is as mature for numeric programming and ML as Python is with Numpy, Scipy, Numba et al.
As an aside, I loved the chrono trigger reference! I was actually listening to some of its music as I viewed the slides.
I know this is old hat for the FP community, but it's worth mentioning that the dot product would be normally be written as (reduce + (map * xs ys)) (or something similar) for the sake of readers scared by the loop acc pattern.