Clojure is not a pure functional programming language. It allows side-
effects everywhere.
On Mar 22, 3:26 pm, Joshua Fox joshuat...@gmail.com wrote:
I dove into Lisp and Scheme several times in the past, but only with Clojure
did Lisp really catch?
1. Clojure abandons the 1950's cruft, with
On Mar 22, 2009, at 21:26, Joshua Fox wrote:
I dove into Lisp and Scheme several times in the past, but only
with Clojure did Lisp really catch?
1. Clojure abandons the 1950's cruft, with all-caps and
abbreviations like SETQ and CDR. However, Scheme does this too,
without achieving
I don't think anyone would claim that Clojure is an easier Lisp, if
anything it is harder. Programming in Common Lisp or Scheme is very
simple. Clojure on the other hand is like CL or Scheme with
additional cognitive demands on the programmer to think about
functional and concurrent
I dove into Lisp and Scheme several times in the past, but only with Clojure
did Lisp really catch?
1. Clojure abandons the 1950's cruft, with all-caps and abbreviations like
SETQ and CDR. However, Scheme does this too, without achieving the ease of
Clojure.
2. Clojure is typically illustrated
