nim-stint VS clojure

> I think the message is more nuanced

I thought it was more nuanced too as they were explaining how integer types can be derived, until I finished the article, and they really did just seem to be complaining that there's a mismatch between compile time and run time.

Dynamic types don't really solve the problems they mention as far as I can tell either (perhaps I am misunderstanding), they just don't provide any guarantees at all and so "work" in the loosest sense.

> otherwise wouldn't lisp with its homoiconicity and compile time macros fit the bill perfectly?

That's a good point, I do wonder why they didn't mention Lisp at all.

> we don't have a solution yet

What they want to do can, as far as I can see, be implemented in Nim easily in a standard, imperative form, without any declarative shenanigans. Indeed, it is implemented here: https://github.com/nim-lang/Nim/blob/ce44cf03cc4a78741c423b2...

Of course, that implementation is more complex than the one in the article because it handles a lot more.

At the end of the day, it's really a capability mismatch at the language level and the author even states this:

> Programming languages ought to be rethought.

I'd argue that Nim has been 'rethought' specifically to address the issues they mention. The language was built with extension in mind, and whilst the author states that macros are a bad thing, I get the impression this is because most languages implement them as tacked on substitution mechanisms (Rust/D), and/or are declarative rather than "simple" imperative processes. IMHO, most people want to write general code for compile time work (like Zig), not learn a new sub-language. The author states this as well.

Nim has a VM for running the language at compile time so you can do whatever you want, including the recursive type decomposition (for example: https://github.com/status-im/nim-stint). It also has 'real' macros that aren't substitutions but work on the core AST directly, can inspect types at compile time, and is a system language but also high level. It seems to solve their problems, but of course, they simply might not have used or even heard of it.

This article will explain how to write a simple service in Clojure. The sweet spot of making applications in Clojure is that you can expressively use an entire rich Java ecosystem. Less code, less boilerplate: it is possible to achieve more with less. In this example, I use most of the libraries from the Java world; everything else is a thin Clojure wrapper around Java libraries.

5. Clojure - $96,381

I have a tangential question that is related to this cool new feature.

Warning: the question I ask comes from a part of my brain that is currently melted due to heavy thinking.

Context: I write a fair amount of Clojure, and in Lisps the code itself is a tree. Just like this F# parallel graph type-checker. In Lisps, one would use Macros to perform compile-time computation to accomplish something like this, I think.

More context: Idris2 allows for first class type-driven development, where the types are passed around and used to formally specify program behavior, even down to the value of a particular definition.

Given that this F# feature enables parallel analysis, wouldn't it make sense to do all of our development in a Lisp-like Trie structure where the types are simply part of the program itself, like in Idris2?

Also related, is this similar to how HVM works with their "Interaction nets"?

https://github.com/HigherOrderCO/HVM

https://www.idris-lang.org/

https://clojure.org/

I'm afraid I don't even understand what the difference between code, data, and types are anymore... it used to make sense, but these new languages have dissolved those boundaries in my mind, and I am not sure how to build it back up again.

As an analogy - my face hasn't changed all that much in a past few years, and I haven't changed my profile picture in those few years. Does it really mean that I'm unmaintained/dead?

> Where can I find latest documentation [...]?

The answer is still https://clojure.org/. And https://clojuredocs.org/ but it's community-maintained so might occasionally be missing some things right after they're released. E.g. as of this moment Clojure 1.11 is still not there since the maintainer of the website has some technical issues deploying the updated version of the website.

For me personally, the best API-level documentation is the source code.

> Where can I find [...] tools / libraries in a easy to use page or section?

There's no central repository of all the available things since they can be loaded from many places (Clojars, Maven Central, other Maven repositories, S3, Git, local files).

But there are community-maintained lists, like the one you've mentioned at https://www.clojure-toolbox.com (fully manual, AFAIK) or the one at https://phronmophobic.github.io/dewey/search.html (automated but only for GitHub). Perhaps there are others but I'm not familiar with them - most of the time, I myself don't find that much value in such services as I'm usually able to find things with a regular web search engine or ask the community when I need something in particular.

They are written in Java, and implement a bunch of interfaces, so the implementation looks complicated, but they are basically just classes with head and tail fields.

https://github.com/clojure/clojure/blob/master/src/jvm/cloju...

Like this.

As a Java/Scala user you should check out Clojure! It is highly recommended (https://clojure.org)

Lisp is not a programming language, but a family of languages ​​with many dialects. The most famous dialects include Common Lisp, Clojure, Scheme and Racket. So after deciding that I was going to learn Lisp, I had to choose one of its dialects.

I learned Clojure to implement a plugin for Metabase (the tool my former company used for creating business dashboards). I probably won’t ever use the language anymore in the future, but learning functional programming was fun and eye-opening.