9 ms·
For the uninitiated, there was a fairly positive critique[1] of Elixir by Joe Armstrong, the creator of Erlang, last year (at least that's what got me hooked to
by bilalhusain 12y ago
For the uninitiated, there was a fairly positive critique[1] of Elixir by Joe Armstrong, the creator of Erlang, last year (at least that's what got me hooked to Elixir).
[1] http://joearms.github.io/2013/05/31/a-week-with-elixir.html http://joearms.github.io/2013/05/31/a-week-with-elixir.html
- infinite8s 12y agoThat's a great read! Were the warts he pointed out ever addressed?
- bilalhusain 12y agoI'll try to cover couple of them. Hopefully, others can fill in: - funs have an extra dot in the name: not fixed because that will lead to inconsistency [1] - send operator: removed earlier this year and the operator is reincarnated as comprehension operator (comprehension being more ubiquitous [2]); although, the proposed syntax wasn't adopted Not sure about funs and def. It appears that not much was discussed about versions in source file and docstrings inside function definition (module doc is already inside); the later one can be dismissed being a common bikeshed in PL design. So, yeah, most of the proposals couldn't make it because of complications. [1] https://groups.google.com/d/topic/elixir-lang-core/_kEBXO0NRDY/discussion https://groups.google.com/d/topic/elixir-lang-core/_kEBXO0NR... [2] http://elixir-lang.org/getting_started/18.html http://elixir-lang.org/getting_started/18.html