[macroexchange]

Clojure is great for beating the averages, see: http://www.paulgraham.com/avg.html

Clojure growth is just fine. If average devs have to add something there is Java. In our experience maintenance of Clojure code is orders of magnitude better than average languages (Python, Java, etc). Yes, object orientation in large organizations leads to the most unimaginable mess. People mostly get paid for unproductive behaviour. Clojure is great for startups where you can do things right.

[zubairq]

I agree with this. It was this Paul Graham essay that made me use Clojure/Lisp in the first place :)

[cutler]

You might also be interested in the story of SISCOG (http://www.siscog.eu/upload/GESTAO-DE-LISTAS/News/PDF/eclm-2...) - a massive transport infrastructure system designed in Common Lisp. I'm sure Clojure would have been chosen if it was developed today.

[flavio81]

Thanks for this post!

>I'm sure Clojure would have been chosen if it was developed today.

Clojure was already available in 2013. The paper shows they made use of the CLOS object-oriented system, which is a key feature of Common Lisp.

[cutler]

2013 is just the publication date. The document cites an implementation of their London Underground system which has been in production since 2008 and a another within the Dutch rail system dating back to 1998.