3 ms·
Are you writing LFE in your professional capacity? I've always been curious if LFE was more than a sort of toy language, it's hard to tell from outside the comm
by rrix2 7y ago
Are you writing LFE in your professional capacity? I've always been curious if LFE was more than a sort of toy language, it's hard to tell from outside the community. I've been becoming more and more enticed to learn Elixir (and Phoenix) and the BEAM, and LFE would be a nice thing to add to the tool belt.
- vector_spaces 7y agoIt looks like the last commit to LFE was about a year ago (not that this necessarily makes it a toy or not) https://github.com/rvirding/lfe/branches https://github.com/rvirding/lfe/branches
- vikeri 7y agoIf you like the BEAM and Lisp, check out Clojerl too: https://github.com/clojerl/clojerl https://github.com/clojerl/clojerl by Juan Facorro
- tombert 7y agoAlas, no, I do not get to do Erlang in any kind of professional capacity now, and haven't since 2015. That said, I do use LFE for a lot of personal projects. I don't mind it being niche-ish largely because Virding wrote it to be a very thin wrapper around vanilla Erlang, so as a result there's not a lot to mess up. With the exception of macros, there's really not many changes to the semantics from regular Erlang, meaning that the transformation to and from LFE is trivial. LFE mostly exists to keep the syntax consistent and cleaner, and while the language is kind of toy-ish, it almost doesn't matter. Honestly, I'd be a lot more worried for something like Joxa or Clojerl, not because they aren't awesome projects (they are), but they don't have as direct of mappings to the BEAM semantics. Also, Virding is very active on the #lfe Erlangers Slack, so typically when I have a question, it is resolved pretty quickly.