Chris Houser wrote:
I think that if teams invest the time they would have spent getting
type declarations right creating tests that can also serve as
example, they'll be pleased with the rapidity with which they can
create quality code.
[My Blog]
All roads lead to JavaRanch
[My Blog]
All roads lead to JavaRanch
Pradeep bhatt wrote:I find the OP's question very strange. Why would something that works for an individual not work for a team ?
John Todd wrote:Have you tried to look at any considerable Lisp or Clojure code before? do you imagine you have a big code base of this code?
Of course nothing wrong with Lisp (well some how ;)) but Lisp will tax your memory and it takes a lot of time to get a Lisp eye.
Also your team have to be elite and highly brilliant (which it is a good thing of course).
In Smalltalk, everything happens somewhere else.
However, in Clojure code things tend to happen exactly where you happen to be looking.
John Todd wrote:Because seriously some times I think Lisp/Clojure is rewarding for the single individual, not for teams.
I spent the morning putting in a comma and the afternoon removing it.
-- Gustave Flaubert, French realist novelist (1821-1880)
Sean Corfield wrote:
John Todd wrote:Because seriously some times I think Lisp/Clojure is rewarding for the single individual, not for teams.
I'm curious John, could you elaborate on why you have this impression? I'd never really thought of a language being more or less suited for use by a team compared to an individual so I'm really interested in hearing why someone thinks this...
Thanks!
John Todd wrote:The location and the number of parentheses which it is again not Lisp/Clojure fault, mainstream languages are very different.
John Todd wrote:The prefix notation.
Mainstream languages have a very different syntax and developers aren't used to read and write prefixed-notation code.
John Todd wrote:Also, Clojure will tax your memory and pushes you to understand a lot of things too soon.
John Todd wrote:Readability.
The location and the number of parentheses which it is again not Lisp/Clojure fault, mainstream languages are very different.
John Todd wrote:Due these points I got the feeling that with Lisp/Clojure, code could be looks encrypted (hence suitable for the individual and not for a team).
Obviously, my feeling isn't accurate.
I spent the morning putting in a comma and the afternoon removing it.
-- Gustave Flaubert, French realist novelist (1821-1880)
John Todd wrote:Excellent note Sean and welcome to the Ranch.
I spent the morning putting in a comma and the afternoon removing it.
-- Gustave Flaubert, French realist novelist (1821-1880)
Sean Corfield wrote:
John Todd wrote:Excellent note Sean and welcome to the Ranch.
Thank you! I guess it's a little ironic that after doing Java for 14 years, what finally got me to create an account on the Ranch was Clojure