[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxdOUGdseq4 -> on of Rich Hickey's best talks
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxdOUGdseq4 -> on of Rich Hickey's best talks
There is a very DIY approach with composition, with lots of library choices. This makes it tough for beginners and intermediate programmers to jump right in and be productive.
That plus functional programming, plus immutable defaults, plus Lisp, filter out developers who don't have a lot of experience, dedication, or a mentor.
The more I learn though, the more I love it.
going to do advent of code in clojure this year though to force myself back into it - it's a great language.
Memory usage is absurd and when you cap it, the performance is worse than Scratch.
You need the right balance of "easy" and "simple" and Clojure does not have it.
But after struggling hard trying to introduce them into companies, I gave up. In contrast, I introduced Go into 3 companies and numerous teams so far and it was so easy for it to gain adoption.
The second is instaparse, which I'd like to use to quickly test a TOML document against the TOML ABNF.
I couldn't get either to work. As in: I can't even get very simple examples to compile. The tooling is super confusing and weird. I appreciate that a lot of tooling you're not familiar with can be confusing and weird, but I managed to get to a lot of languages for my TOML test matrix to work, including many where I'm not familiar with. For some that took some time and patience, but that's okay. Clojure is the only one thus far where I just gave up (for now anyway).
So at least part of the answer to "why isn't it more popular" is "the tooling isn't very good". Maybe the tooling is "simple" by Hickey's definition of that, but it sure isn't "easy" by my definition, and in the end, "easy" does matter, especially for these kind of things.