janet VS core.typed

Seems like a perfect use-case for Janet. (https://janet-lang.org/) A fast minimal VM like Lua, but even more extensible than Lua by being a "Lisp" with macro and C extension capabilities. Not a true Lisp, it's very pragmatic and performance-oriented. But it keeps the good stuff.

You might be looking for: https://janet-lang.org/

It comes with a build tool `jpm` which installs dependencies globally by default, but you can have it be installed in your project folder as well.

I like Clojure, but I never had any good opportunities to use it other than for a few small hobby projects. It is unfortunate that it is so huge with tons of dependencies and no simpler native implementation. I started looking at various LISPs and Schemes to find something lighter to use instead and ended up settling for Janet that I think is Clojure-like enough to be comfortable to use, but in a small native binary with no dependencies and can be embedded in other native programs. I am sure for big, real, projects that Clojure makes more sense, but for my hobby projects and scripts I do not think I will install it again. I am still happy for the things I learned from learning Clojure. It was a real eye-opener for an old OO-programmer.

https://janet-lang.org/

One might also check out Janet for quick scripting tasks.

https://janet-lang.org

Thanks!

I thought about another multiplatform, homoiconic, highly compact language: https://janet-lang.org/ (takes 803 kb on my machine).

It has no types though.

Racket is great, and if you like it you might find Rash interesting:

https://rash-lang.org/

Janet and Gerbil Scheme are also worth a look:

https://janet-lang.org/

https://cons.io/

Point here is that, for instance Janet language does not have cons / pair type but tuple (and so is lispoid, not lisp), but clearly this is sufficient for macros & hence seamless language construction: all you need is to be a lispoid although being a lisp gives another useful feature.

...and Typed Racket is a really powerful type system (see refinement types[4]). So, I thought it's just a matter of time for Clojure to get to that level of power and support. It should be much easier to do this to Clojure than to Ruby, given that you have a working example of how to do it well. So I'm really surprised Clojure isn't gradually typed by now, with most of the code being annotated and type-checked at compile time.

[1] https://github.com/clojure/core.typed

[2] https://github.com/typedclojure/typedclojure

[3] https://github.com/typedclojure/typedclojure/blob/main/examp...

[4] https://docs.racket-lang.org/ts-reference/Experimental_Featu...

gradual typing (spec/schema/malli) or actual type systems like https://github.com/clojure/core.typed . I don't use them too much though.

Do you know about the Typed Clojure project? More or less Racket's contract system, for Clojure:

https://github.com/clojure/core.typed

To me, it's one of the great testaments to the power of Lisp that you can bolt on a static type system after the fact.

There's also https://github.com/clojure/core.typed Typed Clojure