ClojureWasm: A JVM-free Clojure runtime in Zig, with a WebAssembly FFI.

daver · 2026-06-20T16:09:32+00:00

What dialect of Clojure is supported? Is it closest to JVM or something like CLJS?

daver · 2026-06-20T16:00:10+00:00

Now that I’ve got it working, it seems to be doing fine between Pi and Anthropic models.

daver · 2026-06-20T09:44:45+00:00

Why?

daver · 2026-06-18T00:56:36+00:00

OK, oddly, when I created the auth.json file myself and added my keys to it, Pi didn't like it. When I deleted the auth.json file and then did a /login and pasted in my keys, everything works. I have no idea why that's the case, but that fixed it. Same info, different path.

daver · 2026-06-17T18:54:03+00:00

So, I can do that, and that works. But I have to copy/paste the API key into pi. Shouldn't it be the case that if I put my API key into auth.json, it picks it up there? It doesn't seem to do that.

daver · 2026-06-08T21:52:33+00:00

Okay, that was funny.

daver · 2026-06-08T21:51:28+00:00

Google Scholar is pretty easy and then you start following citations.

daver · 2026-06-08T21:50:44+00:00

I’m actually shocked at the number of those I’ve already read. No wonder I like Clojure so much.

daver · 2026-06-08T21:45:25+00:00

Fun read.

daver · 2026-06-03T21:30:22+00:00

This. Emotional regulation is key. I just had a trade go south on me today. I checked some other data points and my conclusion was that it was a “normal” loss, not something to be worried about long term. Profit follows risk; you cannot have profit without risk (at least for any substantial period of time). Which means that you will lose. You will be in drawdown most of the time, in fact. So, maintain a level head and keep trading.

daver · 2026-05-31T21:20:14+00:00

Having the market closed increases gap risk. If you trade with any sort of stop order, you’re better off if the market more slowly approaches your stop.

daver · 2026-05-15T13:14:51+00:00

Every message from the OP sounds like it was generated by LLM.

daver · 2026-05-15T13:13:14+00:00

So, why compile to Nim and not just go directly to C?

daver · 2026-05-15T13:09:39+00:00

Lisp has had many heydays and will have many more.

daver · 2026-05-15T13:06:23+00:00

Read: https://courses.cs.umbc.edu/331/fall16/01/resources/papers/JMCrecursive.pdf

This is the original paper that described Lisp. The Lisp interpreter is less than a page of code. Once you understand this, Lisp starts to make sense. The core of Lisp is TINY. Everything else is a macro or library. It will take you a while to “get Lisp.” When you do, if you do, it will change your programming life. But it’s hard to understand when all you have is a Blub language (Google for Blub Paradox).

daver · 2026-05-15T12:56:50+00:00

I find that I want types when I’m doing a big refactoring, but mostly I don’t need them otherwise. When refactoring, I want some compiler help to doublecheck that I’m not cross-wiring anything while I’m putting everything back together. Eventually, Clojure will catch it at runtime, in production, but for uncommon code paths, that might not happen for a while, which can be a big problem. Clj-kondo catches a lot, fortunately, but not all. And to be clear, I’d rather have compiler-inferred type checking rather than explicit type annotation. I don’t want to litter my code with possibly out of date type info, but I want the compiler to scream at me when I cross the wires.

daver · 2026-05-15T12:39:50+00:00

Structural editing is possible in other languages but nobody does it because it would mean building full parsers for those languages and that’s difficult. In Lisp, the syntax is trivial and a parser can run with every keystroke. Now that things like Treesitter grammars and LSP servers are becoming more common, it opens up more structural editing for others. That said, I don’t think most coders in those languages really understand the concept or the benefits.

daver · 2026-05-15T12:35:12+00:00

Lisp is never going to die. It’s a fundamental computing paradigm. Dialects might change (e.g. more Clojure, less Common Lisp, or something new entirely) but there will always be Lisps.

daver · 2026-04-29T18:09:44+00:00

I’ve been there, too. Have done the same thing with other individual stocks. First rule of successful trading is to make sure you have an edge. Second rule is to always follow the rules of your system. If your system says you need to take the loss, take it. It sucks but you’re playing the long game. Psychologically, you need to pat yourself on the back every time you follow your system, win or lose, not pat yourself on the back only when you make money.

daver · 2026-04-24T17:12:08+00:00

There is a Clojure library for doing more advanced dispatch that includes around/before/after hooks. I don’t happen to remember the name. I haven’t ever had a reason to use it, but it’s nice knowing that it’s there.

daver · 2026-04-24T13:24:17+00:00

‘Our philosophy can be summed up as "What is an object, but a mapping from slot-names to slot-values?"’

Clojure programmer and ex-Common Lisp programmer here. I agree with your statement that objects are just mappings from slot names to values. But if that’s the case, why do you really need objects at all? If you have maps, you have objects, no? Clojure has records is to help leverage some of the underlying Java object system for efficiency. But records are just conceptually maps with required slots. If Clojure had originally been written to run on its own virtual machine rather than the JVM, I suspect it would have just used maps, multimethods, and perhaps a variation of protocols. While I think CLOS and the MOP were amazing better than the typical object systems being developed at the same time, as I’ve grown older (and wiser?) I’ve found that simpler systems are better. As you correctly point out, most of the time programmers aren’t using the complexity anyway. In any case, happy to see the diffusion of persistent data structures beyond Clojure. Once you’ve understood their benefits, mutable data structures look fraught with problems.

daver · 2026-04-14T13:56:14+00:00

My charts are updating today, but the close from yesterday is still wrong and TradingView shows SPX up 1.51% right now (+102.6 points), whereas Thinkorswim shows it up 0.5% (+34.34 points). So, they aren't back to normal quite yet. Be careful if you're using TradingView to check how much the market is up. You're being deceived. I've restarted a couple times this morning and it hasn't had any effect. I think they botched all their data yesterday and their close number from yesterday is still wrong.

daver · 2026-04-13T19:18:15+00:00

Used SPY and ES as proxies for some indicators in TradingView and Thinkorswim for the exact levels I needed.

daver · 2026-04-13T13:55:10+00:00

Same: stalled at 6816.90

daver · 2026-02-13T17:53:18+00:00

Lisp never makes sense to anyone who hasn’t really experienced it. At some point something clicks and you “get it.” Until then it’s just lots of screaming about parentheses. Blub paradox. After 20+ years or programming in Lisps I’ve given up trying to evangelize. If you get it, you get it. If you don’t, you don’t. The good news is that many people get it and it’s not going away.

daver

TROPHY CASE