Clojure is Java. I fundamentally disagree with everything Java. Java is also clunky. The environment that needs to be installed and maintained for Clojure is a lot more complex and subdivided than the one for Racket (which is an all-in-one batteries-included deal). I believe Clojure might be a good option for those coming from Java, if they want to breathe a little, but if I'm already free, it would be a step backwards for me. Racket is a true Scheme (regardless of whether they like being called that).
Also, I already knew Scheme and its simplicity is very appealing to me. If there's a feature lacking, I can implement it. Not true for Clojure, which lacks several important foundational features (TCO, continuations...).
Why would you choose Clojure over Racket? (I'd only be interested in hearing the reasons someone that isn't a Java programmer would have).
Comments
I would like to hear more about your reasons for choosing Racket over Clojure.
Clojure is Java. I fundamentally disagree with everything Java. Java is also clunky. The environment that needs to be installed and maintained for Clojure is a lot more complex and subdivided than the one for Racket (which is an all-in-one batteries-included deal). I believe Clojure might be a good option for those coming from Java, if they want to breathe a little, but if I'm already free, it would be a step backwards for me. Racket is a true Scheme (regardless of whether they like being called that).
Also, I already knew Scheme and its simplicity is very appealing to me. If there's a feature lacking, I can implement it. Not true for Clojure, which lacks several important foundational features (TCO, continuations...).
Why would you choose Clojure over Racket? (I'd only be interested in hearing the reasons someone that isn't a Java programmer would have).