Yes, but Clojure being a Lisp is why I use it. Same as Pharo being a Smalltalk is why I use it.
They are both evolutions, and looking at them there is no way not to immediately see what they are. On May 15, 2014, at 1:56 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 15 May 2014, at 20:18, David Astels <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I agree whole heartedly. Ditch “agile” a tool/language can’t be agile >> anyway… agile is a characteristic of a team, their process, and their >> dynamic. And it’s generally meaningless now. >> >> Also, Pharo IS a Smalltalk. That’s the biggest thing that makes it >> interesting. Saying Pharo isn’t Smalltalk is like saying Clojure isn’t >> Lisp. In Clojure’s case, it’s further from classic Lisp than Pharo is from >> Smalltalk-80. >> >> Dave > > Copied today from http://clojure.org : > > << > Clojure is a dynamic programming language that targets the Java Virtual > Machine (and the CLR, and JavaScript). It is designed to be a general-purpose > language, combining the approachability and interactive development of a > scripting language with an efficient and robust infrastructure for > multithreaded programming. Clojure is a compiled language - it compiles > directly to JVM bytecode, yet remains completely dynamic. Every feature > supported by Clojure is supported at runtime. Clojure provides easy access to > the Java frameworks, with optional type hints and type inference, to ensure > that calls to Java can avoid reflection. > > Clojure is a dialect of Lisp, and shares with Lisp the code-as-data > philosophy and a powerful macro system. Clojure is predominantly a functional > programming language, and features a rich set of immutable, persistent data > structures. When mutable state is needed, Clojure offers a software > transactional memory system and reactive Agent system that ensure clean, > correct, multithreaded designs. > > I hope you find Clojure's combination of facilities elegant, powerful, > practical and fun to use. >>> > > Lisp is _not_ mentioned in the first paragraph, and only once (ok twice, but > in the same sentence) in the second. > > This is all about marketing, not about denying something. Yes, the goal is > not to scare people away or to start with potentially limiting or worse > negative connotations. > >> On May 15, 2014, at 1:02 PM, kmo <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Looking at the new pharo website (it’s great, by the way), I found I was >>> more >>> upset than I thought I would be by the total absence of the s-word. >>> >>> Perhaps lots of people think smalltalk is a dead language but that’s not the >>> only view of smalltalk that people have out there. >>> >>> I came to pharo looking for a new, better way of developing applications. I >>> knew from reading about the history of computing that smalltalk was the >>> purest object oriented language. I knew that it had pioneered many advanced >>> ideas in program development. I knew that it was so far ahead of its time >>> that other languages were still hobbling along behind it trying to catch up. >>> I knew that java and C# were constantly trying to be more smalltalk-like. So >>> I looked for a smalltalk – ideally an open source smalltalk that I could use >>> on Linux. And so I came to pharo. If someone had told me that pharo was not >>> smalltalk, I would not have been interested, I would have though pharo was >>> just a niche product (like Rebol, say) - something that might simply fade >>> away with no history behind it. And I’m sure there are other people like me >>> out there who also have heard of the smalltalk mystique. This heritage is >>> something to be proud of. >>> >>> So why hide what pharo is? >>> >>> It’s not smalltalk’s reputation as /dead/ that I think is likely to put >>> people off. It’s more smalltalks’s reputation as an academic’s language, >>> used to investigate abstruse computer science problems, but unsuitable for >>> mundane day-to-day development. The sort of language that cannot produce a >>> stand-alone executable (a myth - but pharo could do with a deployment wizard >>> of some kind). The sort of language that can produce incredible data >>> visualisations (Roassal) but is unable to put up a decent data entry screen >>> (Spec). (Sorry, that's unfair but I could not resist it! ) >>> >>> Rather than hide the smalltalk origins of pharo, I think they should be >>> shouted from the rooftops. I would add something like this to the web page. >>> >>> */Pharo is an alive-and-kicking, developer-focused, version of smalltalk – >>> the most beautiful idea in the history of computing./* >>> >>> Just my two cents. >>> >>> By the way, I really don't like the idea of using /agile /as a description >>> of pharo. Agile means almost nothing now - it's just a management buzzword >>> for nothing in particular. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> View this message in context: >>> http://forum.world.st/a-Pharo-talk-from-a-ruby-conference-tp4756805p4759204.html >>> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>> >> >> > >
