> c++ was not created for the specific purpose of making a language feel like ruby > Yeah, Joe also said that object orientation was a terrible mistake, and if

> c++ was not created for the specific purpose of making a language feel like ruby > Yeah, Joe also said that object orientation was a terrible mistake, and if you read his design principles, Elixir was swimming upstream of most of them Did you, by any chance, use Elixir in 2011 and never really re-approached it? Back in 2011, Elixir was an attempt to bring Ruby and object-orientation to the Erlang VM. It had a prototype-based model, it had eval-based meta-programming, it had loops, and, as you may guess, it failed pretty spectacularly. But at the end of 2011 and beginning of 2012, I started from scratch. Object-orientation has been removed, a Lisp-based meta-programming model was introduced, most Ruby influences were removed except for minor syntax constructs. Saying that the design principles were "swimming upstream" of OO principles are inaccurate since 2012 - as most of your other comments in this thread. Our main additions at the language level, compared to Erlang, are macros and protocols, where one is Lisp-based and the other is taken after Clojure/Haskell. From 2012, putting the Erlang VM front and center has literally been one of our main design goals.