Yegge, Clojure, and Arc

http://blog.fogus.me/2009/02/06/yegge-clojure-arc-and-lolita-or-days-of-future-past/

by fogus • 17 years ago

94 39 17 years ago

blog.fogus.me

mixmax2• 17 years ago

Arc may or may not be a success, I won't judge. But I do know that the one that does not try will never have success.

So here's to trying.

zurla• 17 years ago

I believe PG said he is taking more of a long-run view on this. He's not trying to make Arc what's hot right now, but rather thinking more about a "hundred-year language"

ricree• 17 years ago

True enough, but I do think there might be a lot of validity in the comparison with hurd. After all, Hurd is still under development, but there is little question that it has been eclipsed by Linux. While many have certainly become aware of the advantages of Lisp, they also want something that just works as much as possible, and the large collection of Java libraries will be a great help in this regard. By the time that arc is "ready" to be the 100 year language, it may be that it is too late to gain acceptance.

Still, I'll admit that only time will tell. Both languages are still quite young, and it is hardly uncommon for languages to develop slowly in obscurity before rising to prominence. Maybe it will gain traction, maybe it won't, but either way I think we will benefit from the increase in competition and the ideas that are generated in its creation.

pg3• 17 years ago

"Eventually, Mr. Graham himself seemed to spurn the language"

Imagine how ridiculous this was to read while taking a break from working on HN, surrounded by windows full of Arc source I was in the middle of editing.

A lot of people seem to feel that a language isn't real unless the designer is talking to them every day. But that's not the only way languages happen. Nor possibly the best way. I feel like you get better ideas if you think in units of occasional essays rather than a stream of tweets. It seems likely the same will be true with language design.

mixmax2• 17 years ago

Don't worry about it, just get back to work :-)

ojbyrne• 17 years ago

Hopefully about as ridiculous as "Birds sang that day my friends."

fogus2• 17 years ago

I'm definitely catching a lot of flack for the spurn comment, and justifiably so considering this window into your work day. I would say that the essay in general was an attempt at levity, as I hoped smart-alecky comments like "birds sang", "voices of children", "Christopher Hitchens", etc... would convey. Although a word like spurn may imply the opposite, having enjoyed your essays, interviews (when I can find them), and especially Arc itself, I am the last person in that world that would tell you how you go about your creative process.

euccastro2• 17 years ago

The second footnote, in which you qualify that comment, should be inlined instead. That clarification, or the lack of it, has too much of an impact on the tone of the rest of the article.

The point of footnotes is that their content is not worth interrupting the flow of the main text. It should be safe for the reader to leave them for later, or skip them altogether.

critic• 17 years ago

Screenshot?

jwilliams5• 17 years ago

Shrug - not sure what the author is trying to say. Seems to be a whole bunch of random quotes to justify the position he's taken.

Xichekolas2• 17 years ago

> Seems to be a whole bunch of random quotes to justify the position he's taken.

Much like the average college essay or, dare I say it, mass media story.

wheels7• 17 years ago

Huh? It's a very tongue in cheek essay. It's well written and in good humor. You guys need to lighten up a bit.

The central point, even if not popular here, seems valid:

Arc seemed like it might be the Lisp family's answer to developing web apps, but didn't hit the ground with quite the maturity that some were hoping, and now it's looking like Clojure is emerging as an interesting leader in that world.

Paul of course might have some more Arc-iness coming down the pipe, but having played with and read some of the source of both Arc and Clojure, as of the currently available releases, Clojure feels like it's less rough around the edges.

andreyf• 17 years ago

However, I think that a language such as Clojure (or more likely one of its inevitable derivatives) will instead be the language of 2109.

That's laughable. The JVM will play as big a role in 2109 as horse-drawn carriages do today. Clojure doesn't even try to be a 100 year language.

More and more, I'm getting the feeling that wondering what kind of language we'll use in 100 years is kind of like people a century ago ago wondering what breed of horse people will ride today.

wheels7• 17 years ago

I'm tempted to agree, but then realizing that FORTRAN and Lisp are both over 50 now and both still actively used, and C is in its 30s, it wouldn't blow my mind if things weren't radically different in another 50 years.

pg3• 17 years ago

FORTRAN and Lisp are both over 50 now and both still actively used

These two languages are "still actively used" in very different senses. The mathematical idea at the heart of Lisp is still around, but those don't time out. And Fortran is alive in the sense that there is something called Fortran, but it probably has less in common with Fortran I than with other more recent languages.

http://www.paulgraham.com/history.html

If Java survives till 2109, it would probably be in the latter sense. Curiously enough, the fact that it is so popular in big, hidebound industries tends to make that likelier. It's tomorrow's legacy software.

nostrademons2• 17 years ago

It's funny how choice of analogies affects your argument. If you'd said "as the qwerty keyboard does today", it would've been just as historically accurate and yet far more amusing.

russell• 17 years ago

Laughable++. Programming as a profession won't exist in 100 years, maybe not even as an archaic hobby. Our machines/AIs/robots will do it for us in much the same way that photoshop has replaced the darkroom gymnastics of 1909. Look how far away web design is from newspaper layout of a century ago. Maybe computers will be modeled on the brain with billions, maybe trillions, of cores (neurons) and trillions of interconnects. We wont be using arc, java, or even python to program them. We wont be programming. The "brains" will be so much better at it.

sethg• 17 years ago

How hard would it be to implement a Clojure++ that is not dependent on the JVM and the Java class libraries, but emulates a JVM when necessary to run legacy code?

albertcardona• 17 years ago

So arc has finally got beyond the stage of initial hype (remarkably fast), and simply continues happily evolving. No need to feed the novelty crows. Please keep up the nice work!

[Edit: and nobody forbids me from using clojure, which is a great way to deal with tones both nice libraries and legacy applications.]

Yegge, Clojure, and Arc

Related Stories