3 ms·
Surprised to see no mention of Elixir so far. Its designers have explicitly focused on "a compact and consistent core". And indeed I found it very pleasant and
by alwaysbeconsing 4y ago
Surprised to see no mention of Elixir so far. Its designers have explicitly focused on "a compact and consistent core". And indeed I found it very pleasant and rewarding to learn for that reason. Everything fits together nicely.
From https://elixir-lang.org/development.html https://elixir-lang.org/development.html
> Since v1.0, the language development has become focused to provide a compact and consistent core. The Elixir team focuses on language features that:
>
> 1. are necessary for developing the language itself
> 2. bring important concepts/features to the community in a way its effect can only be maximized or leveraged by making it part of the language
In other words, as I've heard it put, the language is mostly not growing anymore. It probably helps that it has strong metaprogramming facilities.
- noloblo 4y agoFP like erlang, elixir and haskell are perfectly elegant if only their core language features are used.
- alwaysbeconsing 4y agoLimited experience with Haskell personally but my impression is that Elixir really only has the core, whereas in Haskell it is effectively standard to use language extensions? I don't know how that changes the experience.
- epgui 4y agoWe shouldn’t be counting Haskell’s language extensions imo. They’re extensions because they were not accepted in the language (and might never be).