https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxdOUGdseq4

With LSP mode the standard `lsp-format-region` and `lsp-format-buffer` commands should work, and on the CIDER side `cider-format-defun`, `cider-format-region` and `cider-format-buffer` should also invoke cljfmt.

I'm not sure that's necessarily true... Customers have limited space for games; it's a lot easier to justify keeping a 23GB game around for occasional play than it is for a 154GB game, so they likely lost some small fraction of their playerbase they could have retained.

The Python question I'd say is more narrow, as it asks specifically about "new tools and technologies". What if I have a question about an tool I've been using for a while?

In any case, my point is not what market share Clojure actually has, but that there's reasonable doubt in using SO's developer survey as a basis for that answer. If a far smaller percentage of the Clojure community uses SO than is average for a language, then it's going to skew the results.

As a quick check I asked Codex to look over the existing source code, generated via Copilot using the GPT-5 agent. I asked it to consider ways of refactoring, and then to implement them. Obviously a fairer test would be to start from scratch, but that would require more effort on my part.

The refactor didn't break anything, which is actually pretty impressive, and there are some improvements. However if a human suggested this refactor I'd have a lot of notes. There's functions that are badly named or placed, a number of odd decisions, and it increases the code size by 40%. It certainly falls far short of what I'd consider a capable coder should be doing.

I also briefly tried out some of the other paid-for models, but mostly worked with GPT-5.

I experimented with GPT-5 recently and found its capabilities to be significantly inferior to that of a human, at least when it came to coding.

I was trying to give it an optimal environment, so I set it to work on a small JavaScript/HTML web application, and I divided the task into small steps, as I'd heard it did best under those circumstances.

I was impressed overall by how far the technology has come, but it produced a number of elementary errors, such as putting JavaScript outside the script tags. As the code grew, there was also no sense that it had a good idea of how to structure the codebase, even when I suggested it analyze and refactor.

So unless there are far more capable models out there, we're not at the stage where generative AI can match a human.

In general I find current model to have broad but shallow thinking. They can draw on many sources, which is extremely useful, but seem to have problems reasoning things through in depth.

All this is to say that I don't find the joy of coding to have gone at all. In fact, there's been a number of really thorny problems I've had to deal with recently that I'd love to have side-stepped, but due to the currently limitations of LLMs I had to solve them the old-fashioned way.

That said, it's always worth checking the numbers, so I took a look at the 2024 State of Clojure Survey. Around 18% of those surveyed used Stack Overflow, while the 2024 Python Developers Survey had at least 43% of respondents using Stack Overflow.

Now, you might well say that even so Clojure is still a niche language - and I agree. But it may be the case that instead of a 1.3% share, Clojure has a 3% share - if we assume that the Python community's usage numbers are more typical.

Clojure is clearly a niche language, but Stack Overflow is also not a place that Clojure developers typically go, so Clojure usage there is going to be under reported.

> I do wish Clojure would adopt a bit more of an opinionated way of doing things and coalesce around some solid core/common libraries that the official docs could point to.

Solid core/common libraries to do what?

You use `req.cookies['token']` as an example of a subtle bug in JavaScript, but this isn't necessarily an inherent bug to dynamic typing in general. You could, for example, have a key lookup function that requires you to pass in a default value, or callback to handle what occurs if the value is missing.

    req.cookies.get('token', () => {
      throw new AuthFailure("Missing token")
    })

By 'constraint' I mean something the language disallows or at least discourages. Constraints in software development are generally intended to eliminate certain classes of errors. Static typing, immutability, variable scoping, automatic memory management and encapsulation are all examples of constraints, and represent control that the language takes away from the developer (or at least hides behind 'unsafe' APIs).

By 'expressiveness' I mean a rough measurement of how concisely a language can implement functionality. I'm not talking code golf here; I mean more the size of the AST than the actual number of bytes in the source files.

Adding constraints to a language does not necessarily reduce its overall expressiveness, but static typing is one of those constraints that typically does have a negative effect on language expressiveness. Some will argue that static typing is worth it regardless, or that this isn't an inherent problem with static typing, but one that stems from inadequate compilers.

Immutability, for example, is another great constraint that's not considered in the article, but should certainly be on your mind if you're deciding between, say, Rust and Java.

The article delves into some of the drawbacks of static typing, in that while it can be more expressive, it can also contain a lot of information that's useful for the compiler but decidedly less useful for a reader. The Rust example that loads a SQL resultset into a collection of structs is a standard problem with dealing with data that's coming from outside of your static type system.

The author's solution to this is the classic one: we just need a Sufficiently Smart Compiler™. Now, don't me wrong; compilers have gotten a lot better, and Rust is the poster child of what a good compiler can accomplish. But it feels optimistic to believe that a future compiler will entirely solve the current drawbacks of static typing.

I was also slightly surprised when templates were suggested. Surely if you're aiming for rigor and correctness, you want to be dealing with properly typed data structures.

Oh sure, I won't deny I'm influenced by the society around me, but my morality can't be entirely a product of that society, otherwise I wouldn't find any laws to be unjust.

> You and I don't agree with that, but we aren't a product of the 20s. If you think you would be an exception, then I'd call you egotistical.

But I was in minority when it came to gay rights in the 1990s, and I'm in the current minority when it comes to trans rights in the 2020s.

Why do you assume that I wouldn't also be in the minority regarding civil rights, were I born earlier? I'm not saying I'd be in the 1%, but I'd like to think I'd at least be in the 40%.

I guess I should at least applaud the honesty of someone who implies they would be supporting the Klan or worse if they were born a century earlier, but I think your mistake is assuming everyone is like you.

> In doing any of those things, they've ceased to be protesters. They are now rioters. Rioting is illegal. And it does warrant a violent response.

I would consider that to be extremely immoral. All this time we've been talking about how violence should be a last resort, and now suddenly it isn't?

> Let's look even closer; blocking a highway prevents emergency transportation causing loss of life.

The emergency vehicles would use the shoulder to pass the traffic, and the protestors could just move out the way when an emergency vehicle came. I'm not saying you don't have a point that lives could be endangered, but it's a leap to say that people would certainly die, even in this hypothetical example of yours.

And what about graffiti? How would that endanger life?

> No it's a good way to kill people. See the examples above. You've just lowered your moral standing to less than the law. I don't see how you can come back from that.

So all non-violent civil disobedience is immoral, because you were able to think of an example of how a specific act of civil disobedience could be the cause of a death.

Fine. Let's use the same logic on laws.

The second amendment guarantees every American a right to bear arms, but this includes Americans who are irresponsible. An irresponsible gun owner might leave their firearm where a child could find it, leading to the death of that child.

Voilà: a example of how a specific law could cause a death, which by your logic means all laws must be immoral.

> The columns are getting too narrow to continue. I wish you well, and I hope you'll change your mind about breaking the law, or that you'll at least wind up in jail before you get someone killed.

Thanks for the discussion. I can assure you that I have no current plans to break the law, but if a dream team of professional criminals recruits me for an ambitious and improbable casino heist, you understand that I can't make any guarantees.