11 ms·

Serious question, though I know it will sound negative... I really don't like Rails and don't like Ruby or VB.NET, either (syntactically), which means Elixir is

Serious question, though I know it will sound negative... I really don't like Rails and don't like Ruby or VB.NET, either (syntactically), which means Elixir is off-putting for me, at least in how it's been marketed. Do you know of anyone like me who has come to Elixir and liked it? Note: I like Clojure, F#, and other functional languages, so that's not a hurdle.

randomstudent 9y ago
The syntax is bad (just like ruby), and there are some annoying limitations with macros, but the semantics are very good, and the ability to keep thousands (or hundreds of thousands, or even millions if you know what you're doing) of stateful connections to clients is very useful in practice.
- awj 9y ago
  > The syntax is bad (just like ruby) Any interest in qualifying that opinion?
  - christophilus 9y ago
    Not the OP, but I share the opinion. I strongly prefer a precise syntax over ones where parens are optional, but required in some circumstances, etc. I don't like Ruby's block syntax at all. (Incidentally, I wish Ruby had better first-class function support instead of blocks.) I don't like "end" littered everywhere. I find the `=>` for hashes/dictionaries to be annoying, given how often I use that data structure (granted, I now mostly can do `{foo: :bar}`). There're other things I don't love, but that's a good chunk. Philosophically, I prefer explicit code to implicit (so, Rails is out). And I prefer functional programming to OOP in general, and find that Ruby greatly favors mutable OOP. I've had a tough time navigating around the Ruby parts of most code-bases I've found, largely due to the implicit nature, and annoying language features that allow clever generation of methods in a way that makes them impossible to search for (delegate ... prefix: true for example).
  - randomstudent 9y ago
    Yes. Superficially, `do ... end` blocks look like English, because they are English words. On the other hand, they don't really correspond to any real grammar construct of the English language. They live in the the uncanny valley where you try to read it like English, but you can't actually read it as such. For some reason, the use of keywords like `def`, `defmodule` or `defmacro` doesn't bother me as much. Maybe because they are not block delimiters? In my opinion, braces, delimiters or parenthesis create less visual noise than endless cascades of `end` keywords: def f(x) do ... end end end end There are other block keywords besides `end`, which serve no purpose other than simplify some keyword list arguments at the cost of higher complexity. In general there is too much syntax sugar for things that don't really benefit from it. Parenthesis in function calls are optional in some places but not others, which creates some unnecessary confusion. The syntax for anonymous functions is fn arg -> do ... end The `end` keyword is strange and I keep forgetting it (that's more a problem with me than the syntax, I know). The language is subtly whitespace sensitive in some places, while being mostly whitespace insensitive. Macros can't take a variable number of arguments, which leads to the proliferation of Special Forms (it's a kind of macros that is treated as special by the compiler) which could perfectly be macros if it weren't for this limitation. For a situation where this causes problems and requires some extra weirdness in what should be a simple DSL, look at this Github issue in the new testing library scheduled for inclusion in the standard library: https://github.com/whatyouhide/stream_data/issues/21 https://github.com/whatyouhide/stream_data/issues/21
    - josevalim 9y ago
      > Macros can't take a variable number of arguments, which leads to the proliferation of Special Forms which could perfectly be macros if it weren't for this limitation. This is not true. We have only two variadic special forms: "for" and "with". "for" needs to be implemented as a special form as it emits some optimizations that are only available at the Core Erlang level. "with" needs to be implemented as a special form as it has different lexical properties than a bunch of nested cases. None of those could be implemented with macros. Regarding whitespace sensitiveness, most languages have subtle issues, to varying degrees but especially if you have optional line terminators. Although it is true one or two extra cases appear in Elixir due to optional parentheses.
- innocentoldguy 9y ago
  The macro limitations are necessary to maintain solid concurrency. Yes, it can be annoying, but much less so than trying to track down an intermittent concurrency bug.
macintux 9y ago
If you're not fond of the syntax (and I don't blame you at all, I'm no fan) then you should give Erlang a try.
- christophilus 9y ago
  I have, and quite liked it. The problem seems to be that Elixir has much more momentum and better tooling (from a web-dev perspective). Am I wrong about that?
  - macintux 9y ago
    That definitely appears to be the case. Erlang gives you the same semantics and better syntax, Elixir gives you improved tooling and wider audience.
  - evgen 9y ago
    Elixir definitely has more momentum at the moment (mostly due to an influx of Rails refugees IMHO), but as someone who came over to Elixir from Erlang rather than from Ruby I think you will find that it is not hard to switch back and forth between Elixir and Erlang once you get used to it. Elixir, if you can get past the Ruby -ish syntax, lifted a lot from Clojure as far as what is happening underneath the surface and you can call back and forth between Erlang and Elixir at eny time. This lets you do things like write large chunks of your app in Erlang and then glue everything together using Elixir/Phoenix to take advantage of the larger Elixir web-dev community. Phoenix itself is based upon a lower-level HTTP library written in Erlang. Not perfect, but it does allow you to leverage the advantages of Elixir (e.g. Phoenix and the related web-dev community) while still letting you get most of your work done in Erlang.
    - macintux 9y ago
      Good information. There's also Lisp-flavored Erlang and other options worth exploring: https://gist.github.com/macintux/6349828#alternative-languages-targeting-the-erlang-vm https://gist.github.com/macintux/6349828#alternative-languag...
brightball 9y ago
I learned ruby on a big project about...5 years ago. I've been using it ever since at work and I definitely understand the pain points. With Ruby you really have to learn to understand and appreciate where its strengths are to be productive with it (how close it can bring you to Aspect Orient Programming is probably the biggest). The only similarity that Elixir honestly has with Ruby is clean syntax and general emphasis on productivity. Everything else is different. Same with Phoenix. On the web side of things it has routes, controllers and views...but there's no magic involved. It's all very clear, explicit and flexible in how it does things. The view layer is honestly one of it's biggest strong points because the way it's handled is the core reason for all of those "My site was faster without caching" articles...but you don't have to work differently to enjoy those gains. Big Nerd Ranch did a solid write up on the ins and outs of why. https://www.bignerdranch.com/blog/elixir-and-io-lists-part-2-io-lists-in-phoenix/ https://www.bignerdranch.com/blog/elixir-and-io-lists-part-2... This Choosing Elixir for the Code post that came out last month does a really good job of emphasizing a lot of it. https://pragtob.wordpress.com/2017/07/26/choosing-elixir-for-the-code-not-the-performance/ https://pragtob.wordpress.com/2017/07/26/choosing-elixir-for...
- tmat 9y ago
  Phoenix is completely unnecessary though. I have gone away from it and just use good old Plug and Elixir. Works amazing for me.
  - brightball 9y ago
    Different strokes. One of the big Phoenix perks is that using it instead of just raw Plug has very little performance drop off. It's not a Rails vs Sinatra situation. The Phoenix Channels implementation for websockets and the view layer for web requests are pretty phenomenal IMHO.
  - novembermike 9y ago
    Isn't Phoenix just Plug + Ecto + generators and a folder structure? I always saw it as "how to use Plugs" rather than a separate project.
mischov 9y ago
I came to Elixir from Clojure and was not a big fan of Elixir's syntax, but I've found that after a while it mostly fades into the background (much in the same way that Clojure's parens do). The language and Erlang's virtual machine are generally a joy to work with, and I have no regrets pushing past the syntax.
- christophilus 9y ago
  That's good to hear. It felt kind of arbitrary the handful of times I tinkered with it. Can I ask what you use on the front-end (if anything)?
  - mischov 9y ago
    (If you're asking about what flavor of Javascript I use) I just use plain JS for the bits of JS I need, but nothing I have been working on needs a heavy front-end. There's not really an Elixir equivalent of Clojurescript to Clojure (there is an Elixirscript, but it's a work in progress and I'm curious whether it can ever capture the nice experience of using the Erlang VM). I've seen interest in the Elixir community in Elm and Bucklescript(OCaml) and other compiled-to-js languages, but I think a lot of people just use JS.
  - innocentoldguy 9y ago
    I know you weren't asking me, but Elm on the front end, communicating to Elixir on the back end, has made my life so much nicer. I loathe JavaScript, and this Elm/Elixir combination has made me like web programming again.
acconrad 9y ago
It's a functional language! And it's based off of Erlang, so if you like Erlang, you can use call Erlang directly in Elixir. And if you like piping things / pattern matching (common in F#), I think you'd enjoy it :)
ziikutv 9y ago
I disliked Rails and did not get into Ruby but I love Elixir. YMMV
bobwaycott 9y ago
I’m a Python guy who strongly dislikes Rails, feels meh about Ruby, yet loves Elixir (and likes Phoenix).
- ziikutv 9y ago
  Same same. I should send you a digital pinch.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
rlander 9y ago
I also come from Clojure and Erlang and, tbh, couldn't get into Elixir for various reasons (I've followed the development closely since its inception): * Most of the Elixir community comes from the Rails world, so most of the libraries focus on the web. * Coming from the Ruby world, a lot of these new developers tend to be ignorant of the underlying Erlang machinery, believing that Elixir is the magic that makes Erlang a "modern" and usable language, which is simply not true. * The tendency to favor frameworks over libraries. * I'm probably alone in this one, but I find the syntax off-putting. It adds lots of sigils and complexity to Erlang's very succinct syntax. * In the end, I think Elixir adds very little besides the excellent tooling to the Erlang ecosystem.
- christophilus 9y ago
  You're definitely not alone in disliking the syntax. I agree with most of your points, from what I've seen, except the last one. One thing that Elixir seems to get right is a sane string implementation out of the box.
  - passer-by-123 9y ago
    Not only strings, but better error messages, the new breakpoint support, functions for working with collections, protocols, tasks, etc. It goes quite beyond tooling.
- passer-by-123 9y ago
  I think your second point is unfair. It has nothing to do with Ruby but the fact a lot of people are joining the platform. It takes time for them to understand how everything fits together. Most experienced developers I talk to are actually appreciative of Erlang. Elixir also helps a lot since it points developers to use the Erlang libraries instead of wrapping them. But mostly you shouldn't expect people to grasp functional programming, concurrency and OTP when they are just getting started.
- gamache 9y ago
  > Coming from the Ruby world, a lot of these new developers tend to be ignorant of the underlying Erlang machinery, believing that Elixir is the magic that makes Erlang a "modern" and usable language, which is simply not true. This sounds very subjective, and doesn't agree with my experience. I don't know a single Elixir dabbler that doesn't give Erlang credit where credit is due. It's just that the syntax looks like Prolog and ML got into a nasty car wreck sometime in the 1980's, and the tooling is more like a box of parts that can be assembled into various tools. That's why I use Elixir instead, anyway. > The tendency to favor frameworks over libraries. I know of exactly one framework in Elixir; I assume you mean Phoenix. Phoenix is little more than a few blobs of glue around other, mostly core Elixir, libraries. The Elixir community at large is quite wary of language and framework magic. The fact that lots of us did time with Rails means we've been hurt by the downsides of that approach like few others. :) > In the end, I think Elixir adds very little besides the excellent tooling to the Erlang ecosystem. That's good enough for me!
innocentoldguy 9y ago
First of all, Elixir's relationship to Ruby is only skin deep. The languages aren't as similar as some like to suggest, in my opinion. Personally, I like Elixir better than Clojure because memory in the BEAM VM is isolated. The JVM uses shared memory, which has caused me issues before. I also like the tooling and build tools for Elixir a lot better. Clojure is weak in this area, I think. I like Elixir's syntax much better too. For me, it feels a lot cleaner and easier to type, but that is subjective. Regarding Rails vs. Phoenix, I cannot really speak to that. I don't do monolithic apps anymore, so I don't use Rails or Phoenix. Elixir has a library called Plug built into it that lets me easily make REST APIs for micro-services, so that is what I typically use. For me, this eliminates a lot of the issues I had with Rails.
gamache 9y ago
You should hear Chris McCord (Phoenix author) talk sometime -- he is extremely wary of sprawling design in a way that might please you. I came to Elixir from Scala but also having a Rails background. I was quite sick of Railsy magic, because I'd gone deep with the Ruby metacrap and I got to taste the other edge of the sword. Elixir was a breath of fresh air. If you enjoy concurrent programming with nice syntax and few surprises, you might end up liking it. Elixir is basically Erlang with modern syntax and vastly improved tooling.
jimbokun 9y ago
Elixir seems much more like Clojure without the parens to me than Ruby. (Yes, I know Clojure can actually use fewer parens than the equivalent Java, just referring to the Lispy syntax in general.) Dynamically typed, functional language with immutable data structures and a strong philosophy about how to best handle concurrency and scaling. The key difference is JVM vs. Erlang VM as the base and all that implies.

randomstudent 9y ago

The syntax is bad (just like ruby), and there are some annoying limitations with macros, but the semantics are very good, and the ability to keep thousands (or hundreds of thousands, or even millions if you know what you're doing) of stateful connections to clients is very useful in practice.

awj 9y ago
> The syntax is bad (just like ruby) Any interest in qualifying that opinion?
- christophilus 9y ago
  Not the OP, but I share the opinion. I strongly prefer a precise syntax over ones where parens are optional, but required in some circumstances, etc. I don't like Ruby's block syntax at all. (Incidentally, I wish Ruby had better first-class function support instead of blocks.) I don't like "end" littered everywhere. I find the `=>` for hashes/dictionaries to be annoying, given how often I use that data structure (granted, I now mostly can do `{foo: :bar}`). There're other things I don't love, but that's a good chunk. Philosophically, I prefer explicit code to implicit (so, Rails is out). And I prefer functional programming to OOP in general, and find that Ruby greatly favors mutable OOP. I've had a tough time navigating around the Ruby parts of most code-bases I've found, largely due to the implicit nature, and annoying language features that allow clever generation of methods in a way that makes them impossible to search for (delegate ... prefix: true for example).
- randomstudent 9y ago
  Yes. Superficially, `do ... end` blocks look like English, because they are English words. On the other hand, they don't really correspond to any real grammar construct of the English language. They live in the the uncanny valley where you try to read it like English, but you can't actually read it as such. For some reason, the use of keywords like `def`, `defmodule` or `defmacro` doesn't bother me as much. Maybe because they are not block delimiters? In my opinion, braces, delimiters or parenthesis create less visual noise than endless cascades of `end` keywords: def f(x) do ... end end end end There are other block keywords besides `end`, which serve no purpose other than simplify some keyword list arguments at the cost of higher complexity. In general there is too much syntax sugar for things that don't really benefit from it. Parenthesis in function calls are optional in some places but not others, which creates some unnecessary confusion. The syntax for anonymous functions is fn arg -> do ... end The `end` keyword is strange and I keep forgetting it (that's more a problem with me than the syntax, I know). The language is subtly whitespace sensitive in some places, while being mostly whitespace insensitive. Macros can't take a variable number of arguments, which leads to the proliferation of Special Forms (it's a kind of macros that is treated as special by the compiler) which could perfectly be macros if it weren't for this limitation. For a situation where this causes problems and requires some extra weirdness in what should be a simple DSL, look at this Github issue in the new testing library scheduled for inclusion in the standard library: https://github.com/whatyouhide/stream_data/issues/21 https://github.com/whatyouhide/stream_data/issues/21
  - josevalim 9y ago
    > Macros can't take a variable number of arguments, which leads to the proliferation of Special Forms which could perfectly be macros if it weren't for this limitation. This is not true. We have only two variadic special forms: "for" and "with". "for" needs to be implemented as a special form as it emits some optimizations that are only available at the Core Erlang level. "with" needs to be implemented as a special form as it has different lexical properties than a bunch of nested cases. None of those could be implemented with macros. Regarding whitespace sensitiveness, most languages have subtle issues, to varying degrees but especially if you have optional line terminators. Although it is true one or two extra cases appear in Elixir due to optional parentheses.
innocentoldguy 9y ago
The macro limitations are necessary to maintain solid concurrency. Yes, it can be annoying, but much less so than trying to track down an intermittent concurrency bug.

macintux 9y ago

If you're not fond of the syntax (and I don't blame you at all, I'm no fan) then you should give Erlang a try.

christophilus 9y ago
I have, and quite liked it. The problem seems to be that Elixir has much more momentum and better tooling (from a web-dev perspective). Am I wrong about that?
- macintux 9y ago
  That definitely appears to be the case. Erlang gives you the same semantics and better syntax, Elixir gives you improved tooling and wider audience.
- evgen 9y ago
  Elixir definitely has more momentum at the moment (mostly due to an influx of Rails refugees IMHO), but as someone who came over to Elixir from Erlang rather than from Ruby I think you will find that it is not hard to switch back and forth between Elixir and Erlang once you get used to it. Elixir, if you can get past the Ruby -ish syntax, lifted a lot from Clojure as far as what is happening underneath the surface and you can call back and forth between Erlang and Elixir at eny time. This lets you do things like write large chunks of your app in Erlang and then glue everything together using Elixir/Phoenix to take advantage of the larger Elixir web-dev community. Phoenix itself is based upon a lower-level HTTP library written in Erlang. Not perfect, but it does allow you to leverage the advantages of Elixir (e.g. Phoenix and the related web-dev community) while still letting you get most of your work done in Erlang.
  - macintux 9y ago
    Good information. There's also Lisp-flavored Erlang and other options worth exploring: https://gist.github.com/macintux/6349828#alternative-languages-targeting-the-erlang-vm https://gist.github.com/macintux/6349828#alternative-languag...

brightball 9y ago

I learned ruby on a big project about...5 years ago. I've been using it ever since at work and I definitely understand the pain points. With Ruby you really have to learn to understand and appreciate where its strengths are to be productive with it (how close it can bring you to Aspect Orient Programming is probably the biggest). The only similarity that Elixir honestly has with Ruby is clean syntax and general emphasis on productivity. Everything else is different. Same with Phoenix. On the web side of things it has routes, controllers and views...but there's no magic involved. It's all very clear, explicit and flexible in how it does things. The view layer is honestly one of it's biggest strong points because the way it's handled is the core reason for all of those "My site was faster without caching" articles...but you don't have to work differently to enjoy those gains. Big Nerd Ranch did a solid write up on the ins and outs of why. https://www.bignerdranch.com/blog/elixir-and-io-lists-part-2-io-lists-in-phoenix/ https://www.bignerdranch.com/blog/elixir-and-io-lists-part-2... This Choosing Elixir for the Code post that came out last month does a really good job of emphasizing a lot of it. https://pragtob.wordpress.com/2017/07/26/choosing-elixir-for-the-code-not-the-performance/ https://pragtob.wordpress.com/2017/07/26/choosing-elixir-for...

tmat 9y ago
Phoenix is completely unnecessary though. I have gone away from it and just use good old Plug and Elixir. Works amazing for me.
- brightball 9y ago
  Different strokes. One of the big Phoenix perks is that using it instead of just raw Plug has very little performance drop off. It's not a Rails vs Sinatra situation. The Phoenix Channels implementation for websockets and the view layer for web requests are pretty phenomenal IMHO.
- novembermike 9y ago
  Isn't Phoenix just Plug + Ecto + generators and a folder structure? I always saw it as "how to use Plugs" rather than a separate project.

mischov 9y ago

I came to Elixir from Clojure and was not a big fan of Elixir's syntax, but I've found that after a while it mostly fades into the background (much in the same way that Clojure's parens do). The language and Erlang's virtual machine are generally a joy to work with, and I have no regrets pushing past the syntax.

christophilus 9y ago
That's good to hear. It felt kind of arbitrary the handful of times I tinkered with it. Can I ask what you use on the front-end (if anything)?
- mischov 9y ago
  (If you're asking about what flavor of Javascript I use) I just use plain JS for the bits of JS I need, but nothing I have been working on needs a heavy front-end. There's not really an Elixir equivalent of Clojurescript to Clojure (there is an Elixirscript, but it's a work in progress and I'm curious whether it can ever capture the nice experience of using the Erlang VM). I've seen interest in the Elixir community in Elm and Bucklescript(OCaml) and other compiled-to-js languages, but I think a lot of people just use JS.
- innocentoldguy 9y ago
  I know you weren't asking me, but Elm on the front end, communicating to Elixir on the back end, has made my life so much nicer. I loathe JavaScript, and this Elm/Elixir combination has made me like web programming again.

acconrad 9y ago

It's a functional language! And it's based off of Erlang, so if you like Erlang, you can use call Erlang directly in Elixir. And if you like piping things / pattern matching (common in F#), I think you'd enjoy it :)

ziikutv 9y ago

I disliked Rails and did not get into Ruby but I love Elixir. YMMV

bobwaycott 9y ago

I’m a Python guy who strongly dislikes Rails, feels meh about Ruby, yet loves Elixir (and likes Phoenix).

ziikutv 9y ago
Same same. I should send you a digital pinch.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

rlander 9y ago

I also come from Clojure and Erlang and, tbh, couldn't get into Elixir for various reasons (I've followed the development closely since its inception): * Most of the Elixir community comes from the Rails world, so most of the libraries focus on the web. * Coming from the Ruby world, a lot of these new developers tend to be ignorant of the underlying Erlang machinery, believing that Elixir is the magic that makes Erlang a "modern" and usable language, which is simply not true. * The tendency to favor frameworks over libraries. * I'm probably alone in this one, but I find the syntax off-putting. It adds lots of sigils and complexity to Erlang's very succinct syntax. * In the end, I think Elixir adds very little besides the excellent tooling to the Erlang ecosystem.

christophilus 9y ago
You're definitely not alone in disliking the syntax. I agree with most of your points, from what I've seen, except the last one. One thing that Elixir seems to get right is a sane string implementation out of the box.
- passer-by-123 9y ago
  Not only strings, but better error messages, the new breakpoint support, functions for working with collections, protocols, tasks, etc. It goes quite beyond tooling.
passer-by-123 9y ago
I think your second point is unfair. It has nothing to do with Ruby but the fact a lot of people are joining the platform. It takes time for them to understand how everything fits together. Most experienced developers I talk to are actually appreciative of Erlang. Elixir also helps a lot since it points developers to use the Erlang libraries instead of wrapping them. But mostly you shouldn't expect people to grasp functional programming, concurrency and OTP when they are just getting started.
gamache 9y ago
> Coming from the Ruby world, a lot of these new developers tend to be ignorant of the underlying Erlang machinery, believing that Elixir is the magic that makes Erlang a "modern" and usable language, which is simply not true. This sounds very subjective, and doesn't agree with my experience. I don't know a single Elixir dabbler that doesn't give Erlang credit where credit is due. It's just that the syntax looks like Prolog and ML got into a nasty car wreck sometime in the 1980's, and the tooling is more like a box of parts that can be assembled into various tools. That's why I use Elixir instead, anyway. > The tendency to favor frameworks over libraries. I know of exactly one framework in Elixir; I assume you mean Phoenix. Phoenix is little more than a few blobs of glue around other, mostly core Elixir, libraries. The Elixir community at large is quite wary of language and framework magic. The fact that lots of us did time with Rails means we've been hurt by the downsides of that approach like few others. :) > In the end, I think Elixir adds very little besides the excellent tooling to the Erlang ecosystem. That's good enough for me!

innocentoldguy 9y ago

First of all, Elixir's relationship to Ruby is only skin deep. The languages aren't as similar as some like to suggest, in my opinion. Personally, I like Elixir better than Clojure because memory in the BEAM VM is isolated. The JVM uses shared memory, which has caused me issues before. I also like the tooling and build tools for Elixir a lot better. Clojure is weak in this area, I think. I like Elixir's syntax much better too. For me, it feels a lot cleaner and easier to type, but that is subjective. Regarding Rails vs. Phoenix, I cannot really speak to that. I don't do monolithic apps anymore, so I don't use Rails or Phoenix. Elixir has a library called Plug built into it that lets me easily make REST APIs for micro-services, so that is what I typically use. For me, this eliminates a lot of the issues I had with Rails.

gamache 9y ago

You should hear Chris McCord (Phoenix author) talk sometime -- he is extremely wary of sprawling design in a way that might please you. I came to Elixir from Scala but also having a Rails background. I was quite sick of Railsy magic, because I'd gone deep with the Ruby metacrap and I got to taste the other edge of the sword. Elixir was a breath of fresh air. If you enjoy concurrent programming with nice syntax and few surprises, you might end up liking it. Elixir is basically Erlang with modern syntax and vastly improved tooling.

jimbokun 9y ago

Elixir seems much more like Clojure without the parens to me than Ruby. (Yes, I know Clojure can actually use fewer parens than the equivalent Java, just referring to the Lispy syntax in general.) Dynamically typed, functional language with immutable data structures and a strong philosophy about how to best handle concurrency and scaling. The key difference is JVM vs. Erlang VM as the base and all that implies.