Majorly off topic, but Java 9 came out. Is this positively affecting Clojure somehow?

clojure will be fine, leiningen and boot need to adapt, the next lein is out but requires clojure 1.9

both leiningen and boot will start up slower until they find something else on java 9 to replace the bootclasspath trick

@noisesmith @borkdude boot works today.

:thumbsup:

I didn't know boot also used the cp trick

@borkdude it doesn't, that's why it works today.

thought so yeah

@borkdude oh, I was misinformed https://github.com/boot-clj/boot/issues/529

there was an issue related to dynapath, but that was resolved.

but misinformed by a usually reliable source 😄

@noisesmith yeah, I've come at this late enough to see his retraction put everywhere.

haha, OK

He's been very thorough in retracting it, actually. Surprisingly so now I consider it.

as I said "usually reliable" - a very forthright guy

Just FYI. Confident there will be a lot of iTerm2 users here (though off topic): https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/iterm2-leaks-everything-you-hover-in-your-terminal-via-dns-requests/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsPX0nElJ0k

@borkdude: I thought this talk from Clojure/west was pretty comprehensive about the interaction between Java 9 and Clojure: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fevIDAxQAM

Short version is that none of the Java 9 stuff is especially good for Clojure, and several things are bad for it

@timgilbert thanks

although since then several things have been rejected. For example: did modules actually make it into Java9

I know it failed the final vote, but I don't know how JVM politics work

yes, they did

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/07/02/java_9_release_back_on_track/

I didn't really like the module system too much, because I couldn't really see what problem it solved outside of allowing smaller jvms & executables. I feel like a module system can provide more (versioned dependencies is something I've seen requested a few times) However, I think they mostly made the right pragmatic compromises around allowing access to internal namespaces present in the JVM & undoing the breakiness of this change.

imo they punted on all the hard parts that would have provided value and just have made things harder to use, with so many escape hatches they have also given up the safety that was the theoretical benefit

bleh

would rather they worked on something like value types or TCO instead :)

@alexmiller what were some of those hard parts that they could have chosen to focus on?

I remember @dnolen retweeting a video about an elderly woman talking about activism, equality and other socially relevant things

but I totally forgot the name, anyone have a clue?

it was at a tech conference, but not very tech related

and I can't find it 😛

found it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrCD1wmK9oM sorry