Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

He had me until "Clojure is popular because Paul Graham is an excellent writer." Did he just confuse Paul Graham for Rich Hickey? I don't get that point otherwise. pg is a lisp guy but I don't see the Clojure connection.

Anyway his overall point seems to be that Clojure isn't the only programming language, or the best one for every case. Well, ok. No one worth taking the time to talk to would ever make that assertion, so it seems like wasted bluster.




I've talked to a lot of people about how they got into Clojure, and a fair number credit Paul Graham's essays for selling them on the idea of using a Lisp. I think there's a pretty clear causal link.


For me it was reading SICP which used LISP (scheme) that made me pay attention to clojure.


Clojure did emerge in the right time, it maybe all corelated, maybe Hickey felt a lisp revival coming when pg wrote his essays and decided to build the one he always wanted. That's a question I'd ask him if I could.


So now pg is not only responsible for Clojure's success, he's the reason it exists in the first place? As a lisp, anyway? This is getting pretty ridiculous, here.


I shouldn't have used 'when', it can be read as an implication, but I just meant around the time pg talked about lisp.


Clojure is my favorite language, and I love Rich Hickey, but I don't think I would have sought out something like Clojure if not for PG's essays.

There was a tweet from Nathan Marz that I felt summed it up nicely a while back "Paul Graham set the bait, Rich Hickey reeled me in". Maybe you're right that I think it's more common than it is because it's true for me, but maybe you think it's less common than it is because it's false for you?


Well, I am quite sure that among HN folk there is a high occurrence of people who found decided to give Clojure a shot because of pg's lisp advocacy. This is his website, after all. But HN isn't the world.

But yeah I'm definitely prepared to entertain the possibility that I undervalue pg's essays in the world of general purpose computing. It may be that indeed Rich Hickey should be paying Paul Graham royalties but I truly doubt it.


The point is that pg popularized LISP, and Clojure is the closest extant LISP to the ideal that pg describes in http://paulgraham.com/hundred.html, http://paulgraham.com/arclessons.html, and #6 of http://paulgraham.com/ambitious.html.


Also, I seem to recall pg said that Clojure was (probably) the new Python w.r.t. The Python Paradox.


I definitely went the path of PG essays -> exploring lisps -> Clojure, and I suspect I'm not alone.


>pg is a lisp guy but I don't see the Clojure connection.

Pg -> promoting Lisps. Clojure -> a Lisp. Pg -> influential. Clojure -> got traction on HN and startup crowd.


This is getting pretty close to the Chewbacca defense.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chewbacca_defense


I thought it was pretty obvious. I had a lisp book before I read Graham's essays. I only seriously looked into lisp after PG convinced me to.


It's pretty obvious to you because it's true to you. I guess the irony is lost on you that you've just written a rant about how all programmers aren't the same, and in that rant paint with broad strokes about Clojure is only popular because we've all fallen under the sway of the Paul Graham hypnotoad.

Not true. Some of us have fallen under the sway of the Rich Hickey hypnotoad. :) Anyway, point being that Clojure is gaining traction because it has some objective strengths that converge in a way that isn't common in the realm of programming languages.


I believe I covered that. Though if it were not for PG, everyone would think RH was weird for doing it in Lisp.


You keep saying "everyone" when you mean "I".


And you keep wanting people to mean only "I" when they mean "some".


I did too. The book was On Lisp, by Paul Graham.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: