[mattsfrey]

I take issue with him blanket categorizing Rich Hickey and clojure (spelled closure by him none the less) in the first category along the same lines as haskell. These languages are quite different in almost all respects minus being functional. While the focus of clojure is on simplicity and expressiveness as the author does mention, it was fundamentally created to be a builders language and for getting stuff done fast with minimal complexity and headaches. I think it is actually a perfect mix between the first category and the third category, which is why I love it so much.

[platz]

There is a large overlap in ideas between Haskell and Clojure.

You will also find that many of the people who are interested in Clojure are also interested in Haskell and vice-versa.

In fact, they share enough that it causes a tension because it is a little "too close for comfort". i.e. the concepts they share are quite strong, and the concepts they differ are stark by virtue of being polar opposites.

No, they aren't they same along every axis, but they share enough axes that the crossover is quite palatable.