| > It never said it was the "the uber clojure IDE", not even used any words to this effect. In the beginning it was clearly marketed as a clojure ide,
and if you look at the comments on HN at the time it's clear that it was perceived as such. http://www.chris-granger.com/2012/04/12/light-table---a-new-... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3836978 >"Catering too much to other languages"? What does that even mean? Did anybody signed to the parent that it would only be for his favorite language (the "uber clojure IDE" he dreamt?)? It was due to huge community demand that LT promised to support Javascript and Python too. This is what broke it's back though. By trying to go with all languages at once they failed to focus on getting one right first. They should have added new ones later on. >Nobody stopped the parent or anyone else from using something existing "that actually works" or creating something even better. I've heard it many times over the years in the clojure world, "I'd start on an editor, but it looks like LT is going to be exactly what I want so I'll just wait." Only after its failure was apparent things like Gorilla-Repl popped up. > including having concretely inspired the Swift playground features (as the Swift designer admitted). I'd like a source for that. LT is directly inspired by the work of Bred Victor who _worked for apple_ and Swift has at least one of the Factor devs, which is a highly dynamic language with a live coding environment. > As if it was all a scheme to make $300K off of kickstarter.
He made a lot more than that on Kickstarter, and has some Venture capital as well iirc. Chris has a history of half finished unmaintained projects, so especially with his past I'd be suspicious. Eve is the same, it promises to make programming mainstream but storing your UI in a Datalog DB is a huge mess. DL is great, but the stuff he does with it is just horrid. |