I really like clojurescript in theory, but have a dumb practical reason for not being able to use it. I do a lot of programming in common lisp, and am way too used to a lisp-2.

I literally can't write more than 100 lines of clojure without accidentally shadowing a function binding with a variable binding. I think the only way to break the habit would be to abstain from common lisp for 6 months or longer.

I have the opposite issue trying to write in emacs-lisp after doing lots of clojure. I try to:

  (mapcar my-func my-list) 

and it throws void-variable and then I remember that I have to add the #' reader macro to have it read as a function not a variable.

  (mapcar #'my-func my-list)

It just takes some time to switch the mental model over each time. Clojure did get me in the habit of using unique names for all functions and values because accidentally shadowing a function binding is that more difficult mistake to debug.

In practice I haven't missed the flexibility of a lisp-2, if anything it's just made my code more readable because my names are forced to be more descriptive

the bummer about reagent is that it allocates so many immutable data structures on render. I've not figured out a way to ergonomically write hiccup without paying this constant performance tax, which is felt on a lot of large reagent apps.

using hiccup to write html has been a godsend. I find it much easier to visualize the html that hiccup will generate vs JSX, and I can do arbitrary manipulations on it just like I can with any other clojure data structure.

> I find it much easier to visualize the html that hiccup will generate vs JSX,

Can you elaborate on this? On first glance it seems the same, just with a syntax that uses different symbols than HTML?