3 ms·

Yes, you're absolutely right. Which is why I'm extremely conflicted right now. I definitely like what I'm seeing with Elixir/Phoenix, but should I take the risk

by yumraj 11y ago

Yes, you're absolutely right. Which is why I'm extremely conflicted right now. I definitely like what I'm seeing with Elixir/Phoenix, but should I take the risk or not is a really tough question. It is performant and fault tolerant, so for a startup if that means it can reduce our operational, and support, cost that itself would be a huge win. Deployment seems straight forward, much much simpler than what I had to do with a Rails app that I was experimenting with. Go deployment would be easier, but Elixir seems at worst to be inline with Play/Java (running under Play and not tomcat). There is a huge set of libraries should I need to venture outside Elixir and into Erlang, and moreover I think (not 100% sure) that Erlang can easily call into other language libraries which might come in handy. The way I'm looking at it is implementing small examples in a couple of other options, such as Nodejs/Loopback and Java/Play and then comparing them. So far Elixir/Phoenix seems straightforward and productive, but still evaluating. However, even if Elixir/Phoenix is the best thing since sliced bread, hiring and training is indeed going to be an issue so I've been trying to figure out how to solve than conundrum.

rz2k 11y ago
One counter point is the "Python Paradox"[1], though I don't know how well that conjecture was ever actually supported. However, isn't the Elixir/OTP ecosphere considered relatively practical and tested, rather than just esoteric or purist, even if it is new? [1] http://www.paulgraham.com/pypar.html http://www.paulgraham.com/pypar.html
- simoncion 11y ago
  I can't speak to Elixir/OTP, as I've not -yet- used Elixir. However, every time I've gone to use something in the Erlang/OTP standard library [0] it has always been far less complicated and far more well designed than I feared it was going to be. Maybe this is a reflection of my pessimism, but I feel that it is actually a reflection of the quality of the software. :) [0] Yes, I know that Elixir is a BEAM language and -as such- has access to both Erlang and OTP, so this distinction is terribly fine. ;)
- smt88 11y ago
  When PG says "smarter engineers", it isn't a given that there are more of them or that it matters that they're smart. Many startups don't need top-tier engineers. They need productive, numerous engineers, especially at the beginning when hiring anyone is difficult (let alone someone good).
MCRed 11y ago
Built a team from 2 people to 12 in 2014, starting 8 months before elixir hit 1.0 and didn't have trouble. We attracted a number of people simply because we were using elixir. We also got a number of people who were interested in functional programming. Really, language should never be a barrier to hiring... a good engineer will want to learn a new language, and in my opinion, the really good engineers are already erlang programmers. The biggest barrier to hiring, in my experience building a team for an elixir project, was medieval HR practices. ("oh you can't hire him, cause he wants a plane ticket reimbursed for relocating across the country. He's being greedy." Seriously.)

by yumraj 11y ago

rz2k 11y ago

One counter point is the "Python Paradox"[1], though I don't know how well that conjecture was ever actually supported. However, isn't the Elixir/OTP ecosphere considered relatively practical and tested, rather than just esoteric or purist, even if it is new? [1] http://www.paulgraham.com/pypar.html http://www.paulgraham.com/pypar.html

simoncion 11y ago
I can't speak to Elixir/OTP, as I've not -yet- used Elixir. However, every time I've gone to use something in the Erlang/OTP standard library [0] it has always been far less complicated and far more well designed than I feared it was going to be. Maybe this is a reflection of my pessimism, but I feel that it is actually a reflection of the quality of the software. :) [0] Yes, I know that Elixir is a BEAM language and -as such- has access to both Erlang and OTP, so this distinction is terribly fine. ;)
smt88 11y ago
When PG says "smarter engineers", it isn't a given that there are more of them or that it matters that they're smart. Many startups don't need top-tier engineers. They need productive, numerous engineers, especially at the beginning when hiring anyone is difficult (let alone someone good).

MCRed 11y ago

Built a team from 2 people to 12 in 2014, starting 8 months before elixir hit 1.0 and didn't have trouble. We attracted a number of people simply because we were using elixir. We also got a number of people who were interested in functional programming. Really, language should never be a barrier to hiring... a good engineer will want to learn a new language, and in my opinion, the really good engineers are already erlang programmers. The biggest barrier to hiring, in my experience building a team for an elixir project, was medieval HR practices. ("oh you can't hire him, cause he wants a plane ticket reimbursed for relocating across the country. He's being greedy." Seriously.)