Clojurians Log v2

Thanks for the heads up! I can change :joker to something like :joker/clj, but I don't think there is much practical value in doing so. I mean, how many Clojure platforms (with reasonable adoption to even care about things like this) are we going to have to worry about conflicts? Did you end up changing :bb to :bb/clj?

and :joker/clj is as much susceptible to conflicts as :joker is. Someone could as easily create a new platform with feature :joker/clj. The same goes for :bb/clj vs :bb.

So I am leaning towards just leaving it as is.

IMO the advice to use a qualified keyword was less than compelling, given that it came with no guidance as to what the qualifier should be, nor any mention of grandfathering in existing unofficial implementations such as Joker and babashka. So, FWIW, I too support leaving things as-is.

That being said, I think it’d be unwise to name any platform feature with the cl prefix until/unless it becomes “official”. E.g. while :joker is reasonable to “stake out” for a program named “joker”, and even bb for “babashka”, I think the documentation could — instead of asking for some kind of qualified keyword — simply “reserve” all :cl* (as in a wildcard, i.e. :cl as a prefix) to official implementations.

I didn't change it as I also didn't want to break existing scripts out there.

Thanks for you feedback!

Is there any (interest in doing) a survey of Joker users as to their current use cases, plans/aspirations, etc.? Anytime I tell family/friends about my work on it, they say “what do people use it for”; would be great to be able to send them a link to poll results of something, besides having a better sense of its usage. (Ditto Clojure in general.) I was inspired to ask after running (ha!) across this just now: https://whywerun.strava.com/?lang=en-US&chapter=aspirations