Re: What makes Clojure Clojure?
cljc is (nothing more than) a file extension (the extra c stands for "common") indicating a file that can be read in more than one Clojure platform. cljc files also support reader conditionals by default on read (but they are of course not required if not needed). -- 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 --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: What makes Clojure Clojure?
cljs = ClojureScript clr = Clojure on the Common Language Runtime (aka .NET) cljc = Something that can be interpreted in either clj and cljs (and clr I assume?) using Clojure conditionals. For more info on the excellent cljc read https://clojure.org/guides/reader_conditionals. If you haven't yet experienced an app with Clojure on the backend, ClojureScript on the front end and the messaging logic using cljc, transit and EDN then you should treat yourself and try it :-). On 5 March 2017 at 16:44, Kevin Baldor <kevin.bal...@gmail.com> wrote: > I feel like it should be obvious, but what are the acronyms (initialisms?) > clj and cljc? > > I'm assuming that cljs is ClojureScript. > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Mar 4, 2017, at 6:46 PM, John Newman <john...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Yeah, only Rich can really answer that question, right? :) But for me, > Clojure is increasingly becoming cljc. When a library advertises > compatibility in both clj and cljs, it just looks shinier to me. Feels like > a trend for Clojure libraries in general. And if agents and STM were on > cljs, I'd probably reach of those tools more often on both platforms. > > On that note, if some Clojure concurrency magician would implement a > lightweight threading library in cljc, which worked on both single-threaded > cljs (offloading to webworkers where available) and JVM/CLR, allowing for > STM on cljc... Hell, I'd throw down on a bounty for that. It would really > bring cljs and clj into closer parity. And it would make cljs even more > appetizing to js programmers. And it would reunite cljs with one of clj's > original selling points - how immutability and persistent structures allow > for unparalleled (lol) concurrency solutions. > > I almost got a rudimentary pmap thing working in cljs on core.async with > webworkers by using a binding-hack macro I found online somewhere. I > couldn't find great docs out there though on how to implement a lightweight > threading library. > > On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 6:51 PM Didier <didi...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> The Specter post about if it should be made into core or not got me >> wondering what makes Clojure Clojure. >> >> I'm trying to wrap my head around what is the most minimal set of things >> that uniquely make up Clojure. >> >> Right now, in that set I've got: >> >> The Clojure syntax and its semantics >> The Clojure special forms and their semantics >> The Clojure core libraries and their semantics >> >> So if I implemented a compiler that worked with the above set, it would be >> a valid Clojure compiler. >> >> Now, ClojureScript appears to me like it is not Clojure, but a dialect of >> it. I say that because it breaks some of the syntax semantics of Clojure, >> like not allowing macros in the same namespace as functions. It also breaks >> some of the core semantics, like def creating standard JS vars and not >> Clojure Vars. In this respect, a language like hy-lang is also a Clojure >> dialect, granted it shares even less of the Clojure set. >> >> Is ClojureCLR a dialect of Clojure, or is it a true Clojure >> implementation? >> >> One last thing that is interesting about Clojure versus other languages is >> that it does not provide standard IO. These two things make it so that it is >> kind of dependent on its host to complete its offering as a programming >> language, which means any Clojure compiler will need to provide a mechanism >> for IO. Those would always differ from Clojures to Clojures, so I don't >> think that's part of what makes Clojure Clojure. >> >> What are others thoughts on this? >> >> P.S.: There's no point to this thread, its mostly curiosity. >> >> -- >> 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 >> --- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Clojure" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Clojure" group. > To post to this group, send email to cloju
Re: What makes Clojure Clojure?
I feel like it should be obvious, but what are the acronyms (initialisms?) clj and cljc? I'm assuming that cljs is ClojureScript. Sent from my iPhone > On Mar 4, 2017, at 6:46 PM, John Newman <john...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Yeah, only Rich can really answer that question, right? :) But for me, > Clojure is increasingly becoming cljc. When a library advertises > compatibility in both clj and cljs, it just looks shinier to me. Feels like a > trend for Clojure libraries in general. And if agents and STM were on cljs, > I'd probably reach of those tools more often on both platforms. > > On that note, if some Clojure concurrency magician would implement a > lightweight threading library in cljc, which worked on both single-threaded > cljs (offloading to webworkers where available) and JVM/CLR, allowing for STM > on cljc... Hell, I'd throw down on a bounty for that. It would really bring > cljs and clj into closer parity. And it would make cljs even more appetizing > to js programmers. And it would reunite cljs with one of clj's original > selling points - how immutability and persistent structures allow for > unparalleled (lol) concurrency solutions. > > I almost got a rudimentary pmap thing working in cljs on core.async with > webworkers by using a binding-hack macro I found online somewhere. I couldn't > find great docs out there though on how to implement a lightweight threading > library. > > On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 6:51 PM Didier <didi...@gmail.com> wrote: >> The Specter post about if it should be made into core or not got me >> wondering what makes Clojure Clojure. >> >> I'm trying to wrap my head around what is the most minimal set of things >> that uniquely make up Clojure. >> >> Right now, in that set I've got: >> The Clojure syntax and its semantics >> The Clojure special forms and their semantics >> The Clojure core libraries and their semantics >> So if I implemented a compiler that worked with the above set, it would be a >> valid Clojure compiler. >> >> Now, ClojureScript appears to me like it is not Clojure, but a dialect of >> it. I say that because it breaks some of the syntax semantics of Clojure, >> like not allowing macros in the same namespace as functions. It also breaks >> some of the core semantics, like def creating standard JS vars and not >> Clojure Vars. In this respect, a language like hy-lang is also a Clojure >> dialect, granted it shares even less of the Clojure set. >> >> Is ClojureCLR a dialect of Clojure, or is it a true Clojure implementation? >> >> One last thing that is interesting about Clojure versus other languages is >> that it does not provide standard IO. These two things make it so that it is >> kind of dependent on its host to complete its offering as a programming >> language, which means any Clojure compiler will need to provide a mechanism >> for IO. Those would always differ from Clojures to Clojures, so I don't >> think that's part of what makes Clojure Clojure. >> >> What are others thoughts on this? >> >> P.S.: There's no point to this thread, its mostly curiosity. >> -- >> 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 >> --- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Clojure" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > -- > 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 > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Clojure" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visi
Re: What makes Clojure Clojure?
Yeah, only Rich can really answer that question, right? :) But for me, Clojure is increasingly becoming cljc. When a library advertises compatibility in both clj and cljs, it just looks shinier to me. Feels like a trend for Clojure libraries in general. And if agents and STM were on cljs, I'd probably reach of those tools more often on both platforms. On that note, if some Clojure concurrency magician would implement a lightweight threading library in cljc, which worked on both single-threaded cljs (offloading to webworkers where available) and JVM/CLR, allowing for STM on cljc... Hell, I'd throw down on a bounty for that. It would really bring cljs and clj into closer parity. And it would make cljs even more appetizing to js programmers. And it would reunite cljs with one of clj's original selling points - how immutability and persistent structures allow for unparalleled (lol) concurrency solutions. I almost got a rudimentary pmap thing working in cljs on core.async with webworkers by using a binding-hack macro I found online somewhere. I couldn't find great docs out there though on how to implement a lightweight threading library. On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 6:51 PM Didier <didi...@gmail.com> wrote: > The Specter post about if it should be made into core or not got me > wondering what makes Clojure Clojure. > > I'm trying to wrap my head around what is the most minimal set of things > that uniquely make up Clojure. > > Right now, in that set I've got: > >- The Clojure syntax and its semantics >- The Clojure special forms and their semantics >- The Clojure core libraries and their semantics > > So if I implemented a compiler that worked with the above set, it would be > a valid Clojure compiler. > > Now, ClojureScript appears to me like it is not Clojure, but a dialect of > it. I say that because it breaks some of the syntax semantics of Clojure, > like not allowing macros in the same namespace as functions. It also breaks > some of the core semantics, like def creating standard JS vars and not > Clojure Vars. In this respect, a language like hy-lang is also a Clojure > dialect, granted it shares even less of the Clojure set. > > Is ClojureCLR a dialect of Clojure, or is it a true Clojure implementation? > > One last thing that is interesting about Clojure versus other languages is > that it does not provide standard IO. These two things make it so that it > is kind of dependent on its host to complete its offering as a programming > language, which means any Clojure compiler will need to provide a mechanism > for IO. Those would always differ from Clojures to Clojures, so I don't > think that's part of what makes Clojure Clojure. > > What are others thoughts on this? > > P.S.: There's no point to this thread, its mostly curiosity. > > -- > 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 > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Clojure" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- 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 --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
What makes Clojure Clojure?
Rich considers ClojureScript and ClojureCLR to be dialects of Clojure, not different languages. -- 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 --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
What makes Clojure Clojure?
The Specter post about if it should be made into core or not got me wondering what makes Clojure Clojure. I'm trying to wrap my head around what is the most minimal set of things that uniquely make up Clojure. Right now, in that set I've got: - The Clojure syntax and its semantics - The Clojure special forms and their semantics - The Clojure core libraries and their semantics So if I implemented a compiler that worked with the above set, it would be a valid Clojure compiler. Now, ClojureScript appears to me like it is not Clojure, but a dialect of it. I say that because it breaks some of the syntax semantics of Clojure, like not allowing macros in the same namespace as functions. It also breaks some of the core semantics, like def creating standard JS vars and not Clojure Vars. In this respect, a language like hy-lang is also a Clojure dialect, granted it shares even less of the Clojure set. Is ClojureCLR a dialect of Clojure, or is it a true Clojure implementation? One last thing that is interesting about Clojure versus other languages is that it does not provide standard IO. These two things make it so that it is kind of dependent on its host to complete its offering as a programming language, which means any Clojure compiler will need to provide a mechanism for IO. Those would always differ from Clojures to Clojures, so I don't think that's part of what makes Clojure Clojure. What are others thoughts on this? P.S.: There's no point to this thread, its mostly curiosity. -- 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 --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
