On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 1:18 AM, ngocdaothanh <ngocdaoth...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > I think there are a lot of people who need to choose between Clojure > and Scala to study as a "new" language. I must say that both are bad: > * Clojure doc is hard to understand. > * Scala grammar is complicated. > > I prefer Clojure. I think Clojure feature at this time is OK, thus the > decisive point to draw people to Clojure is doc. I wonder if the doc > at this time is obvious for LISP people, but comming from C/C++, Java, > Ruby, and Erlang (Erlang doc is bad, but it is paradise compared to > that of Clojure :D) and even after reading the Clojure book, I must > say that I can't understand 99% of the doc of both clojure and clojure- > contrib. > > For example, what does the following mean? > ------------------------- > (-> x form) > (-> x form & more) > Macro > Threads the expr through the forms. Inserts x as the second item in > the first form, making a list of it if it is not a list already. If > there are more forms, inserts the first form as the second item in > second form, etc. > ------------------------- > That's funny! I picked on this exact one a bunch of times! I can't agree more. Thank you. On the other hand, are those forums as helpful as this one is? But going back to it, what's even funnier is that, once folks explained what this arrow thing did, it REALLY put me over the top for giving the language a break for a while. I'd say it's not for beginners. It's frustrating to have so many ways to do things all at once when all you want at first is ANY way that works. And the whole point is that there's only one thing to have to know, thanks to the parentheses. And then they invent this arrow thing? Fugetaboutit! No, seriously, I agree, but I think the philosophy seems to be that eventually you will learn it by asking people and/or trying stuff out, and then you can pass on what you learn to others. The community will get big and many people will write nice books and nice docs. You also, sort of, have to be a lisper to gain entry with some of the idioms. Like it seems like some things are held onto because they are the lisp way -- example: "with-". That barely ever means anything to me. > > My wish: There are easy-to-understand examples in API doc. > > Rails is easy to use largely because there are examples in doc of > every API function. > > > On Aug 26, 12:37 pm, Alan Busby <thebu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 5:43 AM, npowell <nathan.pow...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > I mean, I didn't think the article was terribly in depth, but a real, > > > evenhanded comparison would be enlightening. > > > > Reducing it further, I'd be interested just to hear more about the > contrast > > of static typing versus macros. Which is more beneficial for different > > situations and why? > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
