|
|
|
|
|
by kyleburton
5429 days ago
|
|
I'm at my 3rd organization with Clojure, started in late 2008 (I think). In the first I had used Jscheme as an extension and scripting language for one of our JVM based systems. I moved to Clojure for prototyping tasks, other developers working with me showed interest and we were able to use it for small development tools at first. Once those started to show productivity improvements we were able to leverage it for small and then larger projects. Part of getting it adopted was getting the other devs on the team interested and excited about it. The second company was with a team that I joined who was specifically looking for Clojure developers. It ended up being 4 developers, only 2 of which really knew any Clojure previously. The other 2 were Ruby devs. We paired over the entire life of the project and it was a very effective way of transferring skill sets - for all involved. We all learned more and more quickly than I've experienced during any other equivalent time on a project. At my current engagement, I'm the head of tech and was able to choose the technology. I have the permission of the rest of the executive team and given my activity with the local technology community I've had no difficulty finding good developers who are enthusiastic about using Clojure. This may change as we grow, but I know I've still got a pool to pull from. Choosing a non-mainstream technology is often additional work for whomever is leading the decision in any organization. For me it's been worth it: we've gotten passionate people who are more engaged because we're using something they care about. The fallback is to just go with a more mainstream JVM language (Java) - hasn't been and doesn't seem like it'll be ann issue. |
|