Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

OK. Let's state in differently. Clojure is a functional language with a Lisp-look-like syntax, inspired by Lisp. But it isn't a Lisp.

The one of the fundamental part of the Lisp philosophy is to keep a syntactic sugar away, while Clojure is a collection of various syntactic sugar on top of something which looks like Lisp's syntax.

The statement that "Clojure is a dynamic programming language that targets the Java Virtual Machine" is true, while "Clojure is a dialect of Lisp" is just a very-very clever marketing statement.

^&~@%#{}[] - what all this shit is supposed to be? One must learn it. With all that crap Clojure is just another language, which locks like Lisp, especially for those who never saw emacs-lisp or Arc before.

http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/classes/6.001/abelson-sussma... - Lecture 1b: Procedures and Processes; Substitution Mode.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-expression

By far, the cleanest Lisp dialect out there is Dylan, and it uses Algol notation, not s-expressions:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dylan_%28programming_language%2...


http://mumble.net/~campbell/scheme/style.txt

The reader of the code should not be forced to stumble over a semantic identity because it is expressed by a syntactic distinction. The reader's focus should not be directed toward the lexical tokens; it should be directed toward the structure, but using square brackets draws the reader's attention unnecessarily to the lexical tokens.

But it is not only about a style. When [x y] means a different thing than (x y) it is a different language construction, with different behavior.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: