Why I'm Productive in Clojure

http://yogthos.net/blog/49-Why+I%27m+Productive+in+Clojure

by islon • 12 years ago

152 95 12 years ago

dj-wonk7• 12 years ago

What matters to me in a language is whether I can use it without thinking about it.

I love this statement. It reminds me of the what it feels to be good at mathematics (not my words): "Your intuitive thinking about a problem is productive and usefully structured, wasting little time on being aimlessly puzzled." from http://www.quora.com/Mathematics/What-is-it-like-to-understa...

The author also says more about mathematics:

To make an analogy with math, it's nicer to have a general formula that you can derive others from than having to memorize a whole bunch of formulas for specific problems.
This is where Clojure comes in. With it I can always easily derive a solution to a particular problem from a small set of general patterns. The number of things I have to keep in my head is not overbearing.

Any language that lets you spend your brainpower on the essence of the problem is a tremendous advantage and joy. This unlocks creativity and productivity.

S4M4• 12 years ago

Any language that lets you spend your brainpower on the essence of the problem is a tremendous advantage and joy. This unlocks creativity and productivity.

For some reason the only language that let me reach this level is Python. I tried Clojure and Common Lisp, but for some reason I could never be as efficient as I wanted with them, which I think is a shame because in some ways I think the Lisps are superior to Python (due to the "code is data and data is code" of Lisp).

willismichael3• 12 years ago

I really like Python, and use it on a daily basis but I found that after enough experience in Clojure, I prefer it when I have the choice and there isn't a compelling reason to use Python instead.

This isn't a criticism by the way, I do understand that people have different preferences of language idioms, and I do occasionally find myself scratching my head about the idiomatic Clojure way to solve a problem that wouldn't have been so hard for me in Python.

agumonkey5• 12 years ago

Could you tell us more about what you ended up missing from Python ? is it syntax ? concepts ? libraries ?

jcromartie3• 12 years ago

I use Clojure a lot, and did more Python in the past. Whenever I come back to Python, I am frustrated by being unable to remember what's a plain old function and what's a method, and the differences defining functions vs classes and methods etc..

In Clojure I know it's always (except for interop) just functions on values. Some functions dispatch to an implementation based on the type of the value, as is the case with multimethods and protocols, but it's still always just function calls from my point of view while writing the code.

djtriptych• 12 years ago

"code is data and data is code" has a name: homoiconicity.

pjmlp• 12 years ago

I was big on Python side back in the early 2000's, on the Perl vs Python for system administration tasks.

Maybe because of the experience in using scripting languages on the server side for a late 90's .COM startup in terms of performance, I never could convince myself to use Python other than for shell scripting on steroids.

I always looked for other languages in terms of tooling support, IDE support and support for native compilation on their toolchains (JIT or AOT).

akurilin• 12 years ago

Any language that lets you spend your brainpower on the essence of the problem is a tremendous advantage and joy. This unlocks creativity and productivity.

Isn't that the huge advantage of having a compiler? I can let it worry about whether I connected function input/output correctly and only care about what the function itself is doing.

mcguire2• 12 years ago

Alfred North Whitehead on notation[1]:

"By relieving the brain of all unnecessary work, a good notation sets it free to concentrate on more advanced problems, and in effect increases the mental power of the race.

"Probably nothing in the modern world would have more astonished a Greek mathematician than to learn that...the whole population of Western Europe...could perform the operation of division for the largest numbers....

"It is a profoundly erroneous truism...that we should cultivate the habit of thinking what we are doing. The precise opposite is the case. Civilization advances by extending the number of important operations which we can perform without thinking about them. Operations of thought are like cavalry charges in a battle---they are strictly limited in number, they require fresh horses, and must only be made at decisive moments."

That being said, the proper notation is very problem-dependent.

[1] http://introtologic.info/AboutLogicsite/whitehead%20Good%20N...

dj-wonk7• 12 years ago

Thanks -- I had seen this quotation but forgotten the source. It is even better than I remembered.

deno27• 12 years ago

To be a language means to be a way of defining thoughts in order to have them delivered to another.

With no constraints you could just write random rubbish (a bit like this). With the constraints of Java or C# you write code which does it's job, however a lot of work is in fitting your thoughts within the extensive syntax of the languages' constraints.

Clojure, or any other Lisp, helps in that the initial constraints it imposes are simple ().

Once you get a feel for the simplicity you get the feel for the power it brings.

It's a bit like wingtsun kung fu. Your brain is no way fast enough to react to your opponent fast enough to decide for example is this a hard punch or a soft punch. By that point the punch would have been received, restricting your thinking further. However if your body knows the language of wingtsun there is no thinking involved. Period.

Your body knows the language of interacting with another body so leaving your mind the time to make decisions. Your body has embraced the language and can rely on it to keep you alive whilst giving your mind the freedom (time) to make decisions or ultimate kill moves or be creative.

Another word for decisions is creativity. The cost of creativity is time. So embrace your language and be creative with your thoughts given the time your language allows. If you feel your language is asking for help unrelated to your problem then either you don't understand your language or the language is not a language at all and maybe another is better for the current context.

To sum this range in rubbish clojure:

(if (total-time > time-spent-defining-problem) (ask-where-this-time-went total-time time-spent-defining problem) :you-are-at-one-with-your-language-and-in-flow-my-friend)

Or think about:

(def time (apply + allthetimesyouspentdefiningclasseswhenallyouwantedwasafunction))

End of drunken rant.

yawn• 12 years ago

I'm curious to see how Clojure fares against the current crop of folks becoming intrigued by statically-typed languages like Haskell, F#, etc.

gregschlom• 12 years ago

I'm a strong static-typing advocate, and for years this has put me off learning Clojure. (In fact, my very first HN submission, back in 2010, was about Clojure: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1453259). I've been coding exclusively in Clojure for the last month however, and I found it extremely enjoyable to use. Much easier to learn than Haskell, for example, because Clojure isn't purely functional.

The key of Clojure is that it's pragmatic, as opposed to dogmatic. It's a language designed to solve real-world problems in production environments (hence the focus on concurrency, for example).

Also, being a lisp, it's a "programmable programming language", and once you realize the power that that gives you, it's hard not to fall in love with it.

dominotw4• 12 years ago

's a language designed to solve real-world problems in production environments (hence the focus on concurrency, for example).

It would be nice to see example(s) of clojure solving real world concurrency problems.

Touche9• 12 years ago

Why should it fare against them at all? statically and dynamically typed languages have happily coexisted since John McCarthy designed Lisp.

beat• 12 years ago

I have a friend who is deeply into modern static-typed languages (Haskell and OCaml), but has worked professionally for a couple of years in Clojure. His big gripe with Clojure is that it's still dynamically typed, and thus vulnerable to type-based uncertainties. In languages like OCaml, lots of bugs are actually syntax errors and will be caught at compile time.

On the other hand, Clojure is at least a functional language. You get the benefits of immutability, no side effects, higher order functions, etc, in a neat and understandable package. And it runs in the JVM and thus has access to the bazillion or so libraries written in Java, thus getting around the interop problems that other modern languages (and some older ones) have.

sanderjd• 12 years ago

Has your friend used core.typed[0]? I haven't really, but I've wondered if it might be the perfect balance for people who really miss their type system.

[0] https://github.com/clojure/core.typed

smrtinsert2• 12 years ago

I'm a huge static typing fan though outside of Java I'm really only currently into Scala. The issue comes up once in a while, mostly when I miss my tooling, but for a lot of cases, a library like Schema by Prismatic meets what you would want a type system for.

Back to tooling, usually you're into a mess of apis because you are forced to use or choose a type, which then enters a whole world of semantics architects love arguing about. For Clojure, a lot of functionality can be clear and concisely done in maps and lists and the handful of functions which operate on them.

I feel fairly productive.

Touche9• 12 years ago

My biggest problem with Clojure (specifically ClojureScript) is that it's too workflow opinionated. Nearly all Clojure devs use 1 of 2 text editors. Nearly everyone uses Leiningen. Nearly everyone uses some sort of auto-builder. Nearly everyone uses hot-swapping.

Clojure wasn't even optimized for this workflow, it's just the only one that works. So as much as I love the language I keep going away from it because I prefer the freedom of my own workflow.

willismichael3• 12 years ago

I'm curious what language and workflow you prefer? In my opinion, there are plenty of other technologies (quite popular ones at that) that have a specific workflow considered "best practice", arguably because "it's just the only one that works".

Touche9• 12 years ago

I prefer any language that requires nothing more than a text editor (any) and possibly a compiler. Where you can use any build system you want and be pretty much just as productive.

I agree that there are other languages that suffer the same problem, the .NET languages for example (except kinda F#), but there are plenty that do not (C, JavaScript, etc).

skratlo• 12 years ago

When you're buying into a languague, you're also buying into the ecosystem, and if the ecosystem elected it's tools, and it's optimizing it's workflow towards those, then that's what it is. You either buy the whole package (leiningen specifically, I'm not sure what's the editor problem you mention), or you don't.

dj-wonk7• 12 years ago

I'd put it this way, when you try a language, you are testing to see if the ecosystem works for you. Many, if not most, ecosystems have some kind of sweet spot where you find more support.

You don't have to buy the whole ecosystem, but the more you stray the less community overlap you'll find.

andrewvc• 12 years ago

Well, people do use these tools, but honestly, do you really want a language with multiple build tools / package managers? The java world is a mess here. Leiningen is pretty great, no need to fragment the community.

As far as editors go, I'm perplexed. You can use nearly any editor, why do you perceive the need to use one of these 2?

Touche9• 12 years ago

Well, people do use these tools, but honestly, do you really want a language with multiple build tools / package managers?

I want multiple workflows. A single build tool can accommodate that, but Leiningen can't/doesn't.

For example, let's say I have a compiler called mycc. I can build something like this:

    mycc main.c -o main

I might then combine it with an file watcher utility like entr

    find . -name '*.c' | entr mycc main.c -o main

With Leiningen it has to do that all. AND you pretty much have to use the auto rebuilder capability (which means your workflow starts with turning the auto rebuilder on).

As far as editors go, I'm perplexed. You can use nearly any editor, why do you perceive the need to use one of these 2?

Then why do nearly all (probably 95%) Clojure devs use either Emacs or LightTable?

ehurrell• 12 years ago

Completely agree with leiningen, it's not an opinionated choice, just what I've seen with maven seems a huge hassle.

In terms of editors I've hit this a bit, attempting to follow tutorials or the like is frequently met with 'step n: install the clojure plugin for Emacs', then 'eval with <Emacs keybinding>' forever after. The Om tutorials iirc are written as tutorials through Light Table (which seems like a great editor). Having to separate learning about the language and how the editor does things just increases the barrier to entry.

edwinnathaniel• 12 years ago

Let's not exaggerate things here ;). Java world is fine. Majority of projects are still using Maven.

deno27• 12 years ago

Checkout the awesome hoplon library for a different way: https://github.com/tailrecursion/hoplon

mjt02292• 12 years ago

Java has Maven, Scala has SBT, Clojure has Leiningen. That's not so bad. I use all three languages, and the appropriate tool for the language. I don't use hot-swapping for anything.

For IDEs, in Clojure, you have the choice of Vim, Emacs, Cursive (for IntelliJ), Light Table, and Counterclockwise (for Eclipse), and more. All of them are good, pick your favorite.

eropple• 12 years ago

Java and Scala are both pretty usable with Maven or SBT (my own Java projects use SBT now). Clojure is pretty much limited to Leiningen. (And, personally, I find working with Leiningen to be a huge drag.)

dj-wonk7• 12 years ago

Why do you say that nearly everyone uses hot-swapping? What are some examples?

dj-wonk7• 12 years ago

If you have a better workflow, by all means use it and share it with us.

If you want to see a community-oriented look at Clojure based on self-reported data, I'd suggest the 2013 State of Clojure:

http://cemerick.com/2013/11/18/results-of-the-2013-state-of-...

I think you'll find considerable diversity in Clojure. You've got a confluence of people coming from Java, Ruby, Lisp, and other languages. You've got enterprises and start-ups using it. This diversity is certainly one reason that Clojure is so popular and useful to so many people.

nmac2• 12 years ago

I recently migrated to clojure from the php world. I have to say that although I am still learning the language, its actually fun compared to php, which would sometimes feel like pulling teeth to get some basic functionality. Way less boilerplate, and as can be said of anything good, it just works.

Also, the idea of thinking in the problem domain versus the subset of problems that arise in languages like php is an acute difference. Just being able to focus on the product as your programming keeps you on task and thinking about new ways to implement features, etc. -- big difference.

deno27• 12 years ago

I made a career move from dentistry to programming. And I would say that anything I've used pre-clojure is a good approximation of pulling teeth. But even pulling teeth has the benefits of knowing when you're finished and the direct customer feedback is usually good.

cheez2• 12 years ago

Why did you decide to switch from dentistry?

elwell• 12 years ago

I'm in the process of making the move from PHP to Clojure as well. FYI, deploying to Amazon Elastic Beanstalk with the beanstalk leiningen plugin is a breeze.

nmac2• 12 years ago

Just looked into this, and I am quite surprised with the fluid UX. Thanks for the suggestion!

sternenseemann• 12 years ago

Being popular on HN is not the best thing for Webservers...

yogthos4• 12 years ago

It certainly isn't, my poor server went catatonic under the relentless onslaught. :)

davexunit2• 12 years ago

REPL-driven development is wonderful. I'm not a Clojure user (yet), but I write a lot of Scheme. My programs are living creatures that adapt and evolve as they are running. It's refreshing to see that Clojure is seeing real use in the industry. Gives me hope that I can get paid to work with a language I really enjoy some day.

jptman• 12 years ago

I'm a bit curious about your comment. Do you mean during development you run your code on a REPL and change portions of it , or do you mean you run code in Production in a REPL and change portions of it as it's running?

I'm interested to know your setup in either of those cases. The one inconvenience I have about REPL based development is that I need to copy over an expression from my editor into the REPL and if I make any changes in the REPL, like fix a typo, I need to make sure to copy it back to my editor.I guess this may be because I don't use Emacs and have an editor and REPL in one.

deno27• 12 years ago

REPL Driven development as it's called is really yes having your whole system running at your thingertips (even production for the adventurous). You can execute arbitrary code and get results or see what state has changed. You can also redefine anything (in Clojure at least) that is referred to, such as functions and variables (I use these terms loosely here).

Normally you have your IDE configured so that anything executed is executed in the context of the running REPL session. So there should be no need to copy/paste.

When done properly with tests running on every change you really can't, as a developer, get any quicker feedback. It's brilliant and empowering!

Your issue could be emacs but, for Clojure at least, there is the Cursive Intellij plugin which is now definitely usable. Also there are the brand new IDEs like LightTable.

LightTable.com started out with some very different ideas with regards to code organisation and there is still a lot of potential work there. But lighttable instead became open source and a core for plugins. The plugins now range from rainbow parentheses to 'pick your language' evaluation.

If you want to discuss any of these ideas or others please do or PM me. I'm always willing to discuss as my girlfriend is hopeless. But then for everything not programming she keeps me sane.

davexunit2• 12 years ago

My setup involves GNU Guile Scheme, Emacs, and the geiser extension for Emacs. I boot up my Guile application and it spawns a REPL server. In Emacs, I run M-x connect-to-guile to connect to that server. From there, I edit my source code files as normal. However, once I've made an edit, I press C-x C-e next to the region of code that I want Emacs to send to the Guile REPL and view the results. The edit/apply process repeats until I'm done working and kill the application.

It's a really great way to work. I've spent a good amount of time making this workflow work well for applications that run an event loop, such as a game or web server, by writing a "cooperative" REPL server for Guile [0].

I hope this makes some sense!

[0] https://gnu.org/software/guile/manual/html_node/Cooperative-...

Why I'm Productive in Clojure

Related Stories