4 ms·

I don't find this useful in any way since Elixir is weakly typed and a worse Lisp than Python..

by 0b01 6y ago

lawn 6y ago
How exactly is Elixir "a worse Lisp than Python"? Elixir is a functional language and it even has Lisp-style macros.
- 0b01 6y ago
  deleted
  - pmarreck 6y ago
    douches get downvotes https://games.greggman.com/game/dynamic-typing-static-typing/ https://games.greggman.com/game/dynamic-typing-static-typing... The hard evidence that static typing is an overall-win is lacking. Period. or, more succinctly, https://i.imgur.com/zbU1wwH.jpg https://i.imgur.com/zbU1wwH.jpg
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - moocowtruck 6y ago
      how is static typing lacking evidence? don't we use that in rust to prevent the existence of large swaths of errors vs say C? i know for sure when turning on typescript for some javascript projects at work we found many issues, those all seem like wins? Why when I look at some dynamic languages say for example clojure i see stuff like type annotations in their core libraries, and then spec's to help provide a lot of what a type system can do? do you have maybe a counter argument to this fellow https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTl7Jn_kmio https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTl7Jn_kmio
      - fulafel 6y ago
        The usual things that are brought up in this kind of HN thread are that studies don't show an advantage in delivered software, and tradeoffs / limitations of type systems are bad tradeoffs, and the vast majority of things caught by static type systems are trivial errors that are easily caught anyway, and that these days a lot of interfaces are APIs between systems that the static type systems don't cover anyway. Thanks for the interesting sounding talk link. It's "Types are like the Weather, Type Systems are like Weathermen - Matthias Felleisen" from ClojureTV, for those who rarely click on youtube links. Mathias Felleisen a well known Racket guy, author of How to Design Programs, etc.
      - pmarreck 6y ago
        It probably helps in Rust. Perhaps it helps more in certain specific languages or contexts. The studies found no general “overall cost” improvement; in other words, the extra correctness came at the cost of tons more boilerplate and “fighting the type system”
dudul 6y ago
Elixir is not weakly typed, it has strong typing on the contrary. The word you're looking for is "dynamic". Javascript and PHP are weakly typed, neither Erlang nor Elixir.
- conradfr 6y ago
  PHP is weakly typed but it has a strict type option nowadays, and class properties can also be typed. Combined with function parameters typehinting (which easily beats typespecs) it's a great and productive developer experience I must say.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
ashton314 6y ago
First: Elixir has strong dynamic typing. JavaScript has weak dynamic typing. Second: As someone who uses Elixir for their day job, Racket for PL research, and Python for some CS classes, I can state with 100% confidence that Elixir is much closer to Lisp than Python. Elixir has macros that operate on the level of abstract syntax trees! Indeed, I think that is how most of this project was implemented.
pmarreck 6y ago
I don't find this comment useful in any way since you are so weakly-informed and strongly-belligerent. Elixir and Erlang are strongly- BUT DYNAMICALLY- typed. Next time, please check yourself before you wreck yourself.

I don't find this useful in any way since Elixir is weakly typed and a worse Lisp than Python..

by 0b01 6y ago

I don't find this useful in any way since Elixir is weakly typed and a worse Lisp than Python..

lawn 6y ago

How exactly is Elixir "a worse Lisp than Python"? Elixir is a functional language and it even has Lisp-style macros.

0b01 6y ago
deleted
- pmarreck 6y ago
  douches get downvotes https://games.greggman.com/game/dynamic-typing-static-typing/ https://games.greggman.com/game/dynamic-typing-static-typing... The hard evidence that static typing is an overall-win is lacking. Period. or, more succinctly, https://i.imgur.com/zbU1wwH.jpg https://i.imgur.com/zbU1wwH.jpg
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - moocowtruck 6y ago
    how is static typing lacking evidence? don't we use that in rust to prevent the existence of large swaths of errors vs say C? i know for sure when turning on typescript for some javascript projects at work we found many issues, those all seem like wins? Why when I look at some dynamic languages say for example clojure i see stuff like type annotations in their core libraries, and then spec's to help provide a lot of what a type system can do? do you have maybe a counter argument to this fellow https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTl7Jn_kmio https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTl7Jn_kmio
    - fulafel 6y ago
      The usual things that are brought up in this kind of HN thread are that studies don't show an advantage in delivered software, and tradeoffs / limitations of type systems are bad tradeoffs, and the vast majority of things caught by static type systems are trivial errors that are easily caught anyway, and that these days a lot of interfaces are APIs between systems that the static type systems don't cover anyway. Thanks for the interesting sounding talk link. It's "Types are like the Weather, Type Systems are like Weathermen - Matthias Felleisen" from ClojureTV, for those who rarely click on youtube links. Mathias Felleisen a well known Racket guy, author of How to Design Programs, etc.
    - pmarreck 6y ago
      It probably helps in Rust. Perhaps it helps more in certain specific languages or contexts. The studies found no general “overall cost” improvement; in other words, the extra correctness came at the cost of tons more boilerplate and “fighting the type system”

dudul 6y ago

Elixir is not weakly typed, it has strong typing on the contrary. The word you're looking for is "dynamic". Javascript and PHP are weakly typed, neither Erlang nor Elixir.

conradfr 6y ago
PHP is weakly typed but it has a strict type option nowadays, and class properties can also be typed. Combined with function parameters typehinting (which easily beats typespecs) it's a great and productive developer experience I must say.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

ashton314 6y ago

First: Elixir has strong dynamic typing. JavaScript has weak dynamic typing. Second: As someone who uses Elixir for their day job, Racket for PL research, and Python for some CS classes, I can state with 100% confidence that Elixir is much closer to Lisp than Python. Elixir has macros that operate on the level of abstract syntax trees! Indeed, I think that is how most of this project was implemented.

pmarreck 6y ago

I don't find this comment useful in any way since you are so weakly-informed and strongly-belligerent. Elixir and Erlang are strongly- BUT DYNAMICALLY- typed. Next time, please check yourself before you wreck yourself.