3 ms·
It's interesting that you would say a language could 'taint the simplicity and cleanliness of the syntax' of another language. You can still work purely in Erla
by jeremy_k 7y ago
It's interesting that you would say a language could 'taint the simplicity and cleanliness of the syntax' of another language. You can still work purely in Erlang and not deal with Elixir can you not?
I'll say my own personal experience is that I knew of Erlang but had never really looked into it or knew of the benefits of OTP and BEAM. Being a Rubyist, Elixir bridged that gap for me and I've been reading more and trying to learn more about this new (to me) environment.
I would also say that Elixir has benefited Erlang because José hasn't just built Elixir, but has gone and helped implement new things into Erlang; the entire environment is benefiting from drawing in new engineers.
- BoorishBears 7y agoIt's interesting how your comment seems to be trying to refute parts of mine... yet says nothing contrary to what I've said, and in fact repeats a lot of it, but in different words I mean, I didn't imply you can't work in Erlang, and I already stated drawing Ruby-ists isn't a bad thing... so I guess I don't get why anything but the middle paragraph was needed here.
- b3orn 7y agoMy problem with Elixir is kind of similar to C/C++. Interfacing with C code from C++ is easy, interfacing with C++ code from C isn't easy and you end up with loads of ugly wrapper code. The same goes for Erlang and Elixir, interfacing with Erlang code from Elixir is easy, interfacing with Elixir code from Erlang is ugly. And the more people start writing code in Elixir I fear that more people are turning away from Erlang. And even if the entire environment in total benefits from more people using Elixir, that environment will more and more turn into an almost pure Elixir environment with very little of Erlang left.