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

Clojure is a Lisp.



Of course it is. Does it have the following?

- Code as Data? Check

- Homoiconicity? Check

- First-class Functions? Check

- Macro System? Check

- Automated memory management? Check

- REPL-driven interactive development? Check

I don't know what else do they want. I feel like this is some kind of "programming language racism" and "Lisp eugenics" bullcrap.

Yes, Clojure is different than Common Lisp, but it is important to recognize that diversity in languages and their ecosystems can be valuable, and differences don't diminish the contributions or identity of a language within the broader Lisp family. Why can't we instead borrow good ideas from Clojure and implement them in CL and vice-versa?

I love Lisps. I love Common Lisp and Clojure, Fennel and even Emacs Lisp. Whenever I need to jump between Javascript and Typescript or even between different frameworks, I feel like I'm programming in different languages. That doesn't happen with Lisp. I can relatively easily switch between Clojure, Clojurescript, Clojure-Dart, Fennel, Emacs Lisp and CL and still feel like I'm programming using the same language. Completely different platforms - same language. I really don't understand what this fuzz is about. Clojure is a Lisp.


OK, you have rules for what is and is not Lisp. Rules different from yours are wrong. Gotcha!

I think that the lack of an interactive experience is not necessarily a deal breaker. We could have a Lisp implementation which compiles to an executable image which doesn't run until uploaded to a target. This could use an existing dialect like Common Lisp or Scheme and be used by Lisp programmers to deploy some of their existing programs.

If you were to fix your rules to be more inclusive, it would be more consistent with your diversity rhetoric. (Not saying you should do anything; your rules are your business.)


> OK, you have rules for what is and is not Lisp.

These are not "my rules," I didn't make up this shit. Many renowned computer scientists have spoken about Clojure and at Clojure conferences: Guy Steele, Paul Graham, Matthias Felleisen, Gerald Jay Sussman, Daniel Friedman,... [some names just off the top of my head]. I'm pretty sure, if not all of them, most of them would definitely say "Clojure is a Lisp". So, until someone of that caliber steps onto the stage and tells us differently, that's what I'm calling it.




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

Search: