Hacker News Reader

Comment by ithrow | Hacker News Reader

All this just to avoid writing JS in nodejs for simple scripts? why add more complexity to simple things? just to write JS with parenthesis? clojurescript is overkill and definitely tedious to use for this because is not suited for scripts just doing lots of imperative, side-effecting stuff and dealing constantly with mutable APIs.

I love lisp but... https://github.com/borkdude/nbb/blob/main/examples/puppeteer...

"Look how cool I'm, I downloaded this thing just to add parenthesis to my JS script!"

View on HN

Why would I want nodejs? All of that to avoid writing C for simple things?

Why would I want C? All of that to avoid writing Assembler for simple things?

This feels like a personal attack, bud.

I think the real advantage is scripting with a REPL in your IDE. Whipping up a script becomes trivial because you can test every data transformation (heck, every expression!) with a keystroke. There's no great way to do this in a language without s-expressions.

As a datapoint, I don't know javascript but I do know clojurescript.

Yeah, good luck with that.

Thanks! I’m a hobbyist with limited time and I earn my salary without programming, so I don’t need to cater to any market demand, in case you were condescending on my employability prospects.

Not about employability. You can't really leverage cljs well without knowing JS but I'm sure you would disagree.

Nah, I just disagree with your treating of both “leveraging cljs well” and “knowing JS” as binary things. I’m sure there’s a correlation but I have not found the need of learning neither java nor javascript.

This is like saying "you can't really leverage Java well without knowing JVM bytecode." Which is to say: I also disagree with you :)

dumb analogy, the issue is libraries, you don't need to read bytecode to be able to use a Java library in Java or Clojure but you do need to read Java. Same with Cljs and JS.

I have to say, one has to be some special kind of "dumb" to learn Clojure, but at the same time lose the ability to understand Javascript or Java. One doesn't choose one tool simply because "they don't know the other tool". Sometimes, and quite often, the decision gets made precisely because they gained significant knowledge in both.

I disagree with this. I use Clojure and Clojurescript at my day job and know very little JS and virtually nothing from ES6 and beyond. The only time, that I can think of, that I actually needed to directly reference Javascript was when I was needing to do some downloading of files through an API call. I used some of the Google Closure classes as well as Blob. Other than that everything I need is already in a nice clojurescript wrapper over the javascript libraries.

> without knowing JS

What "knowing JS" even entails here? Reading through ECMAScript's Specification (of over 800 pages long) at least once? Having to deal with browsers since 1998? Knowing your way around numerous "standard libraries"? Understanding perplexing landscape of perpetual changes in JS/TS?

Most full-stack developers (arguably) are not Javascript experts, yet they do sometimes need to write small front-ends or deal with nodejs.

People can enjoy and/or get utility out of different things.

> why add more complexity to simple things?

I feel you haven't grasp yet, the actual difference between seemingly simple and truly simple things. Path to simplicity quite often is not that straightforward.

Try for example converting the example you're pointing at to javascript, just for comparison.

These are just small examples by nature.

See e.g. https://github.com/chr15m/c64core for a non-trivial project in nbb.

Equally bad, I don't see where are you getting any value from cljs there.

You are funny. If you don't see the value that's ok. The value for me is mostly that I enjoy writing CLJS more than JS. Although I don't hate JS, I just enjoy CLJS more.

you are not really writing cljs... but whatever floats your boat.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com