3 ms·

Adding more programming languages just fragments the job market further. That might mean fewer jobs available for other languages and allow software developers

Adding more programming languages just fragments the job market further. That might mean fewer jobs available for other languages and allow software developers less movement between companies. How many times have you seen a job advert and you think oh wow that looks interesting, I'd like to work there... Oh wait, they use X on the backend, I don't have any previous commercial experience with X so damn, I can't join the company. The more programming languages there are, the more often this will happen. The time for creating and promoting new programming languages is over, we have to move forward and work with the languages whose ecosystems have had 20 years to evolve - This is where the real value is. I'm certain that using Elixir over Haskell, Go or even JavaScript/Node.js adds no extra value to any given project... It only restricts the pool of potential job candidates. If you use any programming language for long enough, eventually, you will be very productive with it - The language itself doesn't really matter. Its just a waste because there are already so many languages optimized for the server-side use cases which Elixir aims for and which are already doing a great job.

klibertp 9y ago
> [...] allow software developers less movement between companies. > How many times have you seen a job advert and you think oh wow that looks interesting, I'd like to work there... Oh wait, they use X on the backend, I don't have any previous commercial experience with X so damn, I can't join the company. Wait, just who are you, then? An intern fresh out of high school? Or do your circumstances impair your ability to learn (I hope I'm not being insensitive)? Are you a programmer? I ask because it never happened to me, and I never even heard of something like this from non-junior programmers. If the company I'd like to work at uses a language that I don't know (there's actually pretty decent chance if they use something mainstream) I believe in most cases it would be enough to tell them I'll learn the language in a week and after a month I'll be writing decent quality production code. There is no reason - except if I do bad in the interview, maybe? - to not believe me, as that's generally accepted as a standard timeframe for such things. In my case that's a lie, as I can get started with a language in a matter of hours and start writing production code after a few days - but I admit I'm unusual on this. > I'm certain that using Elixir over Haskell, Go or even JavaScript/Node.js adds no extra value to any given project... Programming languages are being created for a reason and "adding value" in some kinds of programming tasks is a prime concern when designing them. Different languages make different choices and in effect work better or worse in given circumstances. Replacing Node with Elixir (any BEAM lang) would immediately give you a true SMP support without using spawned processes, for example, and could possibly shorten and simplify your code if you have many communicating, long-lived services in there. That's an added value, right? The saying "use the right tool for the job" fits here perfectly. > If you use any programming language for long enough, eventually, you will be very productive with it - The language itself doesn't really matter. Exactly - so why limit yourself to a single language? How long do you think you will be working? What will you do once you've mastered a language and realize that you have 20 more years to work with it? Wouldn't that make you bored after a while? > Its just a waste because there are already so many languages optimized for the server-side There is not a single language which offers the same mix of features as Elixir. It's perfectly possible to have a system which would benefit from the just right mix of features and then not having these features is a tremendous waste as well. It's not like I don't understand where you're coming from: in my youth, when I was learning C++, I also was frightened by the complexity and believed that it will take years to master it. And it did take years, mostly because it's C++ and I was alone. However, the next language I learned - PHP if memory serves - took me just a couple of months to get good at. Then, when I passed the 20 "langs known" mark, I realized that learning languages is no longer a problem at all and instead made it into a hobby. In other words, yes, you need some level of understanding of programming to be able to efficiently learn new languages. I think it is better to strive to reach this understanding instead of assuming new languages are bad.
- jondubois 9y ago
  I've been programming for 14 years in about 10 different programming languages... It's a struggle for me to list them all (let alone learn them). I only really needed two of them; all the others were a waste of time because they're so similar to each other. Learning new languages is not hard for me, I can pick up a new one in a single day and my code could fool someone into thinking that I've been doing it for a while (if you ignore development speed)... But unfortunately that's not true mastery, you can only truly master a language or framework after working with it full time for a couple of years. It takes a long time to absorb all the intricacies of a language to produce really good software. You could spend a few years studying French and think that you know it all by the end just because you can talk fluently, but in reality you couldn't even write a basic child's novel, let alone a top-seller, or a Pulitzer prize novel. It depends on what kind of work you want to produce.
  - klibertp 9y ago
    > 10 different programming languages... It's a struggle for me to list them all (let alone learn them). That's still very little. You can take a look at my site (in profile, the "Languages" page) where I listed PLs which I learned. There's 126 entries on that list (to save you a couple of clicks). I'm not boasting - just offering a different perspective. > all the others were a waste of time because they're so similar to each other. If they are so similar, then learning them should be very easy and quick, no? > I can pick up a new one in a single day and my code could fool someone into thinking that I've been doing it for a while (if you ignore development speed)... In a single day? So it's not that much effort, is it? Assuming, of course, you won't hit the language which is different enough and your intuitions and experience become useless. > you can only truly master a language or framework after working with it full time for a couple of years. You're wrong, in part. It takes a lot of time to master your first language and a few others in the beginning. Later it can take quite a lot of time to learn your first language with a paradigm you're unfamiliar with. But languages are similar to each other, can be classified into types and studied in bulk. With enough languages (and frameworks) learned you develop an intuition of what happens and how. With enough different languages known, you develop an intuitive feel for what's the best way of solving a problem in a given language. There's also a bit of theory to be learned, but once you have it down there's really nothing that can surprise you. Personally, I've had the hardest time when learning J. There are exactly two other languages which are similar (APL and K) and they both are even harder to get into. So the reverse is also true: if you don't know enough about a certain kind of languages, you're going to have a hard time. In the end, I think we disagree on what we consider mastery. I don't believe you have to remember all the finest details of implementation to say you've mastered the language - as long as you can easily drop down to the compiler or interpreter source, read it and understand without effort. It's all pretty easy then, believe me.

klibertp 9y ago

> [...] allow software developers less movement between companies. > How many times have you seen a job advert and you think oh wow that looks interesting, I'd like to work there... Oh wait, they use X on the backend, I don't have any previous commercial experience with X so damn, I can't join the company. Wait, just who are you, then? An intern fresh out of high school? Or do your circumstances impair your ability to learn (I hope I'm not being insensitive)? Are you a programmer? I ask because it never happened to me, and I never even heard of something like this from non-junior programmers. If the company I'd like to work at uses a language that I don't know (there's actually pretty decent chance if they use something mainstream) I believe in most cases it would be enough to tell them I'll learn the language in a week and after a month I'll be writing decent quality production code. There is no reason - except if I do bad in the interview, maybe? - to not believe me, as that's generally accepted as a standard timeframe for such things. In my case that's a lie, as I can get started with a language in a matter of hours and start writing production code after a few days - but I admit I'm unusual on this. > I'm certain that using Elixir over Haskell, Go or even JavaScript/Node.js adds no extra value to any given project... Programming languages are being created for a reason and "adding value" in some kinds of programming tasks is a prime concern when designing them. Different languages make different choices and in effect work better or worse in given circumstances. Replacing Node with Elixir (any BEAM lang) would immediately give you a true SMP support without using spawned processes, for example, and could possibly shorten and simplify your code if you have many communicating, long-lived services in there. That's an added value, right? The saying "use the right tool for the job" fits here perfectly. > If you use any programming language for long enough, eventually, you will be very productive with it - The language itself doesn't really matter. Exactly - so why limit yourself to a single language? How long do you think you will be working? What will you do once you've mastered a language and realize that you have 20 more years to work with it? Wouldn't that make you bored after a while? > Its just a waste because there are already so many languages optimized for the server-side There is not a single language which offers the same mix of features as Elixir. It's perfectly possible to have a system which would benefit from the just right mix of features and then not having these features is a tremendous waste as well. It's not like I don't understand where you're coming from: in my youth, when I was learning C++, I also was frightened by the complexity and believed that it will take years to master it. And it did take years, mostly because it's C++ and I was alone. However, the next language I learned - PHP if memory serves - took me just a couple of months to get good at. Then, when I passed the 20 "langs known" mark, I realized that learning languages is no longer a problem at all and instead made it into a hobby. In other words, yes, you need some level of understanding of programming to be able to efficiently learn new languages. I think it is better to strive to reach this understanding instead of assuming new languages are bad.

jondubois 9y ago
I've been programming for 14 years in about 10 different programming languages... It's a struggle for me to list them all (let alone learn them). I only really needed two of them; all the others were a waste of time because they're so similar to each other. Learning new languages is not hard for me, I can pick up a new one in a single day and my code could fool someone into thinking that I've been doing it for a while (if you ignore development speed)... But unfortunately that's not true mastery, you can only truly master a language or framework after working with it full time for a couple of years. It takes a long time to absorb all the intricacies of a language to produce really good software. You could spend a few years studying French and think that you know it all by the end just because you can talk fluently, but in reality you couldn't even write a basic child's novel, let alone a top-seller, or a Pulitzer prize novel. It depends on what kind of work you want to produce.
- klibertp 9y ago
  > 10 different programming languages... It's a struggle for me to list them all (let alone learn them). That's still very little. You can take a look at my site (in profile, the "Languages" page) where I listed PLs which I learned. There's 126 entries on that list (to save you a couple of clicks). I'm not boasting - just offering a different perspective. > all the others were a waste of time because they're so similar to each other. If they are so similar, then learning them should be very easy and quick, no? > I can pick up a new one in a single day and my code could fool someone into thinking that I've been doing it for a while (if you ignore development speed)... In a single day? So it's not that much effort, is it? Assuming, of course, you won't hit the language which is different enough and your intuitions and experience become useless. > you can only truly master a language or framework after working with it full time for a couple of years. You're wrong, in part. It takes a lot of time to master your first language and a few others in the beginning. Later it can take quite a lot of time to learn your first language with a paradigm you're unfamiliar with. But languages are similar to each other, can be classified into types and studied in bulk. With enough languages (and frameworks) learned you develop an intuition of what happens and how. With enough different languages known, you develop an intuitive feel for what's the best way of solving a problem in a given language. There's also a bit of theory to be learned, but once you have it down there's really nothing that can surprise you. Personally, I've had the hardest time when learning J. There are exactly two other languages which are similar (APL and K) and they both are even harder to get into. So the reverse is also true: if you don't know enough about a certain kind of languages, you're going to have a hard time. In the end, I think we disagree on what we consider mastery. I don't believe you have to remember all the finest details of implementation to say you've mastered the language - as long as you can easily drop down to the compiler or interpreter source, read it and understand without effort. It's all pretty easy then, believe me.