undefined | Better HN

0 pointsLyngbakr1y ago0 comments

Personally, I prefer it when there is a solid default tool chain for a language rather than having to choose from one of several. That way, I know pretty much what to expect when I open any project in that language. I feel like this is one of the few places where Clojure dropped the ball and that deps.edn should've been there from the get-go.

0 comments

th0ma51y ago

What language ecosystem does this right?

asa4001y ago

Both Rust and Elixir get this right. I have used both in anger, for money, to ship real stuff, and while neither is perfect, they are both great.

To a first an approximation, every Rust project uses Cargo and every Elixir project uses Mix, and they are both first-party tools so they have a level of stability, approachability, and ubiquity that comes with being tied to the language. I’d kill for Clojure to have something half as good as Cargo or Mix and have it be the only build tool, but that ship has sailed.

riwsky1y ago

phtrivier1y ago

And rust. And elixir. And caml, which, after many years, settled on dune. And, apparently, common lisp, which settled on ASDF sometime before I reached puberty. And, probably, every language born after java.

Which is all the weirder : rich hickey could (should ?) have figure that "building infra" was one of the aspect where clojure was a great fit ("lein as an ant+maven killer.") To be fair, it wasn't as much in the zeitgeist at the time.

Still, a new language nowadays must have, on aday one, a package manager and a linter and a formatter and a test runner, etc... - just like it must have an LSP.

It's funny looking a zig trying to fight this.

It's funny watching roc reinventing that weel.

I guess jblow will rationalize against it for jai.

I wonder if someone is going to standardize "the rest" of the toolchain. ("Language dependency manager protocol", anyone ?)

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse