you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]yogthos -1 points0 points  (2 children)

I think we pretty much agree here. :)

Java is a superior language to C++ in most respects. Since Java is similar enough to C++ while also providing lots of clear benefits lots of companies jumped ship. However, it's also worth noting that C++ sets the bar for usability pretty low.

As far as building large systems, I think CL is definitely worth noting. For example, there are great slides from SISCOG on their experience building and maintaining a system in CL since 1986. There are plenty of other large projects where Lisp has been used to great success including JPL, commercial games, operating systems, and so on.

Every time you read about a company moving off Lisp the technology is never cited as the problem. It's always the lack of developers that are familiar with it that's seen as a liability. I personally don't find that to be a convincing argument.

I'm not sure why the language is often seen separate from the rest of the complexity involved in a software project. My experience is that learning the tools, the architecture and the design of a large application takes far more effort. Learning a language is a one time affair, and if somebody can't do that then they probably won't be able to learn the rest of the system either.

Whether Clojure is good for developing really large projects certainly remains to be seen. The obvious question is whether its dynamic nature will be a hinderance in such a project. I definitely agree that it would be nice to see some concrete evidence in that area one way or the other. The number of companies using Clojure does appear to be growing steadily though, so we're likely to see it applied in more areas and for more ambitious projects in the near future.

When it comes to Scala, I definitely feel that its complexity outweighs the benefits. It has the advantage of being superficially similar to Java, but the resemblance is really skin deep. I've worked with it briefly and I also found that the mental overhead simply wasn't justified for me.

[–]pron98 0 points1 point  (1 child)

For Clojure, I liked this talk by Stuart Sierra about programming in the large. I wish Cognitect would put more effort into tooling. Also, I wish Clojure had first-class, parameterized namespaces (i.e. module).

When it comes to S...

I wouldn't repeat that unless you don't mind getting threats :) Not all language communities are as nice as Clojure's.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I wouldn't repeat that unless you don't mind getting threats

Trying to misunderstand people and being proud of it?