If you are curious and sincerely interested in this general concept, check out what we are doing at https://focusretreatcenter.com and ping me if you want to set up a prototype trial run scenario for your group/concept. We already did the "buy a giant house for cheap" part and are still experimenting on exactly what to do with it.
I can transcribe audio from meetings in almost real time. It doesn't actually require blazing fast WPM to do that. I get plenty done. And no, the first working squeezebox prototype is not my daily driver. Second version I hope but it's more about the process and I wouldn't be surprised if it is just the next entry in a fairly long line of keebs to challenge my original ergodox full-hand and walk away leaving the ergodox as king of the hill.
v2105 is nearly done and the top row angle is larger and it's definitely more comfortable. The version in the post kind of ended up that way due to testing from positions other than really at my desk with everything really set up.
Palm and the Palm Pilot. UI responded instantly to every input. 2 AAA batteries lasted a month. With years of heavy usage I never encountered a single bug.
So "Closure" is a real comp sci word used to describe variable scope lifetimes in languages includes JavaScript and others. So when google named their project, they basically took a word from JavaScript/CompSci that starts with the same letter as "Compiler" (plus other similar sounds). I don't think there's much more to it than that.
"Clojure" is a programming language again based on the regular word "closure" but with some twists: The "j" is a tip of the hat to Java and the JVM where clojure is designed to run. This also has the nice property that the "zh" sound of the "s" in closure is also used with "j" sometimes (I think due to French). Thirdly I believe the "CL" letters of clojure are a tip to Common Lisp.
> So when google named their project, they basically took a word from JavaScript/CompSci that starts with the same letter as "Compiler" (plus other similar sounds). I don't think there's much more to it than that.
Isn't it because it can optimize the output so that it only includes those dependencies that the program references, i.e. the whole program is like a closure that closes over its dependencies?
Thanks for explaining, but it remains confusing! And it seems so unnecessary.
In general, I think you should not pick names from the domain where your product/tool operates in. For example, it would be equally confusing if a car manufacturer would brand its cars "Engine" or "Wheel". Such naming is worse than just choosing a fantasy name.
P.S.: As another example, "Java" was a good name. But then Netscape invented a language and called it "JavaScript", which was of course a very poor choice.
I may be reading more into 'initially he thought' than you meant but Clojure CLR is real and has been around for years:
https://github.com/clojure/clojure-clr
