3 ms·
I am curious about Elixir, but I really can't bring myself to spend time mastering a language with dynamic types. You are removing one class of errors from your
by tail_exchange 2y ago
I am curious about Elixir, but I really can't bring myself to spend time mastering a language with dynamic types. You are removing one class of errors from your application, but at the same time inviting a new one that has been solved decades ago.
I'm aware that this is a very controversial take, because lots of people love duck typed languages, but after working in large codebases, they are a hard pass for me. There's a reason why TypeScript was created for JavaScript, Sorbet was created for Ruby, and type hints is so popular with Python. I think I've seen something about gradual typing being introduced in Elixir, but gradual typing is still a long ways from enforcing type safety. Until then, I'll stick with Go.
If I am mistaken and there is a "TypeScript for Elixir", then I would love to know about it.
- innocentoldguy 2y agoI've worked with strongly typed languages and duck typed languages. I've also worked a lot with Go and Elixir. In my opinion, the tradeoff between the elegance of Elixir's actor-based functional style vs. Go's warty imperative style is more compelling than static typing vs. duck typing. I love working with Elixir. Go is something I tolerate.
- tail_exchange 2y agoThat's a fair trade if you don't like Go, but I love working with it, so for me it has to be something more compelling than trading safe types for actor-based functional style. Go's imperativeness never bothered me.
- azurelake 2y agoElixir is in the process of adding a gradual type system right now FWIW.
- tail_exchange 2y agoIndeed, I mentioned it in my comment. Thanks.