Jump to content

Talk:Clojure

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Lack of good sources

[edit]

I'm having trouble finding 3rd party references about the language that are not either directly from or one-step-removed-from Rich Hickey (the language creator) which would violate the "no original research" doctrine? Where can I find other references to this language Derarthur (talk) 23:37, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's a lot of hype about this language everywhere on the web, unfortunately a lot of references are just coming from software programmers blogs. But I think we should find other references than just the main source. Hervegirod (talk) 00:02, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not an expert on Wikipedia policy or anything, but here's my advice: It seems entirely appropriate to use Hickey as the primary source for any "non-controversial" statements about Clojure (e.g. definitions of its architecture), because he is its sole creator. However, for more "controversial" statements, such as those along the lines of, "Clojure is so super cool! It's much better than Haskell!", the proper phrasing would be, "According to Hickey, 'Clojure is super cool and much better than Haskell'"--and cite as before. You're simply not going to find too many "good" secondary sources for at least a few years, since the language is neither mainstream nor academic. 65.183.135.231 (talk) 15:16, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've added loads of citations and references hoping to get rid of this notice. Is the article quality now sufficient to remove this notification? Most of the citations are non-controversial and cite the language manuals, documentation, changelogs and announcement blogs. Ane (talk) 11:36, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

List comprehension example

[edit]

When the article grows, you can link to Clojure's list comprehension example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_comprehension#Clojure —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.138.105.130 (talk) 19:33, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Expand

[edit]

Mark Volkmann's article is a great starting point to expand this wiki article in the same format as other programming language articles: http://ociweb.com/jnb/jnbMar2009.html 217.132.53.109 (talk) 11:07, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pronounce?

[edit]

Is it like 'clojure' or 'cloyure' or 'clohure' or 'clozhure'? —Preceding unsigned comment added by OsamaBinLogin (talk • contribs) 16:47, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's pronounced like closure. I added a note about that. 93.173.238.209 (talk) 16:12, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First appeared

[edit]

The newsgroup states that Clojure birthday was on 16th October 2007. Should the "Appeared in" mention the specific date? 93.172.131.46 (talk) 14:38, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Example contains errors

[edit]

This example is missing a bracket. 

 (let [vec-refs (vec (map (comp ref vec)
                          (partition nitems (range (* nvecs nitems)))))
       swap #(let [v1 (rand-int nvecs)
                   v2 (rand-int nvecs)
                   i1 (rand-int nitems)
                   i2 (rand-int nitems)]

--68.161.111.143 (talk) 18:48, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The example is correct; it works in Clojure 1.2. 72.177.114.33 (talk) 21:43, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rich Hickey's article deleted

[edit]

Wikipedia's deletionists somehow reached the bewildering conclusion from this page that consensus is Rich Hickey is not notable and should be deleted. I'm too old for internet politics. I give up.

Here's the salvage from Rich Hickey's original page:

Rich Hickey is the creator of the Clojure programming language, a Lisp dialect built on top of the Java Virtual Machine.
Before Clojure, he developed dotLisp, a similar project based on the .NET platform.
Hickey is an independent software developer and a consultant with over 20 years of experience in many facets of software development. He has worked on scheduling systems, broadcast automation, audio analysis and fingerprinting, database design, yield management, exit poll systems, and machine listening.
He spent about 2½ years working on Clojure before releasing it to the world, much of that time working exclusively on Clojure without external funding. When he finally announced it, the announcement consisted of one email to some friends in the Common Lisp community.
Sources

Rich Hickey continues to produce interesting ideas and implementations, including Datomic and Codeq. He really should have his own article, folks! RichMorin (talk) 00:52, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I found it a little weird that the wikipedia page for Rich the person points to Clojure the language... seems to me like his page should either exist for real (my vote!) or be deleted completely and have the usual 'page does not exist' stub. What is going on with this auto-redirect? --Lansey (talk) 15:35, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This kind of redirect is called a redirect with possibilities. It's common practice when two topics are related and we only have an article for one of them, and it serves two purposes:
  • It allows interested readers to find some content about the removed topic, such as here with the section about Rich Hickey (topics that are not notable can still be covered as sections of a larger topic).
  • It signals editors about a topic with the potential to become a stand-alone article if enough sources are accumulated. When the sub-section pointed by the redirect growths too large, it should be split and placed under the title of the redirect page. Diego (talk) 17:21, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rich Hickey's article being deleted really illuminates a larger problem on Wikipedia, look at the discussion for deletion linked above. There is a single user, Artem Karimov, arguing for deletion and every other person in the discussion voted to Keep the article. Yet because this one person made it their life to argue with and respond to everyone who disagreed with him, he made sure the article got deleted. Disgusting. 173.68.18.98 (talk) 16:08, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Variants

[edit]

Why is compojure listed in the variants section?

I think we should make a clear distinction between official variants (ClojureCLR, ClojureScript) and unofficial ones, like las3r and Clojure-Py.

--Ivant (talk) 07:54, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Compojure --Kvng (talk) 15:48, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

About to remove the multi-paradigm tag in the right-side box.

[edit]

Clojure is not pure functional, but that doesn't sufficiently make it a "multi-paradigm" one.

Any objections?

Also See:

--Crlf0710 (talk) 06:31, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Clojure Criticism

[edit]

User TvojaStara added a remark of Steve Yegge about the Clojure community as criticism on Clojure: https://sites.google.com/site/steveyegge2/ten-predictions He also claims that Yegge is/was a Clojure evangelist and that he can be found by searching on Google for 'clojure criticism'. I think that's all not noteworthy as criticism in a Wikipedia entry for the Clojure programming language. For a slightly better example of programming language criticisms compare the Wikipedia page on Criticism of Java. Yegge's role as 'Clojure evangelist' is unclear. He wrote a foreword to a Clojure book. Other than that he is known for writing 'rants' on various topics. The remark by Yegge provides an opinion, but no further information on what he bases this opinion. Yegge writes: 'but they're fairly user-hostile'. The factual basis of this remark is completely unclear.Joswig (talk) 22:18, 7 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Clojure. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:37, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Title not including "(programming language)"

[edit]

Is there a reason why Clojure doesn't include "(programming language)" like most other programming language articles do? I'm referring to Go (programming language), Haskell (programming language), Erlang (programming language), Rust (programming language), Julia (programming language), Scala (programming language), etc. MarkN (talk) 19:41, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Those other programming languages have that parenthetical because their names require disambiguation from other things with pages on Wikipedia. There is no other page about anything called "Clojure," so this page requires no such parenthetical. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.168.1.24 (talk) 20:39, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

History Dates

[edit]

The history section doesn't give any dates. It would be much more informative with dates in my opinion. The "Language Overview" section does, but one reading the history section wouldn't know this. Perhaps they can be merged somehow. -Anonymous — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.233.255.213 (talk) 19:22, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

How prolog influenced Clojure?

[edit]

There is a standard library part which resembles prolog but I can't find other similarities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.29.55.159 (talk) 20:19, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Clojure&oldid=1209425486"