3 ms·

Some of this is opinion, but I looked at Go and didn't like its exception model (or total lack thereof). Checking for errors after every possible bit of code th

Some of this is opinion, but I looked at Go and didn't like its exception model (or total lack thereof). Checking for errors after every possible bit of code that could go wrong seemed like an ugliness to me (disclaimer: beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and I'm certain a Go guy will chirp up here in its defense... which is fine!). Elixir/Erlang almost couldn't be more different in this regard, which basically embrace runtime failures (things fail, so... "Let it fail quickly"). An uncaught runtime error in Elixir/Erlang causes the node to shut down after logging the error and, if it has a supervisor node (which is quite likely), the node is restarted in a fraction of a microsecond. The developer is expected to monitor the logs and watch for common faults and fix those. This is in fact where the "nine nines" reliability comes from- restarting nodes extremely quickly after runtime errors. The Erlang philosophy is basically, "these systems exist in the real world, which is sometimes unpredictable and flaky... accept it and allow the code to move on quickly." This happens to be a good strategy for website code- Remember that Erlang was built to run cell networks... How often are cell networks down these days? I was also a "disenfranchised" Ruby guy, tired of working on classes of bugs that would never even see the light of day in a functional language, which is why Elixir's syntax was appealing (I had already looked at Erlang, but I didn't like its syntax). Again, there's taste and opinion here, of course. Coding has become awfully fashion-driven, of late. There's a class of programmers who don't care about syntax or don't see the point of it. Ruby/Rails folks are not typically that type of programmer, and that's the first group who will likely migrate to Elixir. Finally, what really raised my eyebrows about Elixir was its macro facility http://elixir-lang.org/getting-started/meta/macros.html http://elixir-lang.org/getting-started/meta/macros.html Prior to Elixir, full-fledged macros were only a feature of homoiconic languages (the Lispy ones where the syntax is also a data structure). Elixir came up with a clever way to do macros, while retaining syntax.

pbowyer 11y ago
Thanks, that's a really helpful answer. > Again, there's taste and opinion here, of course. Coding has become awfully fashion-driven, of late. I agree and that's a really enlightened view. But I'm quite glad - it means the ecosystem is maturing if we now can be fashion driven, rather than having to care about "does it work?"
- lectrick 11y ago
  > Thanks, that's a really helpful answer. I really like this language, I've met Jose Valim and he's a super nice, super smart guy, as is Chris McCord. So I feel naturally motivated to promote it. Also, it's just lots of fun to work with! > it means the ecosystem is maturing if we now can be fashion driven, rather than having to care about "does it work?" Well in my case, as I said, I got tired of certain classes of Ruby bugs, and certain, shall we say, "uglinesses" which presented themselves, but only after (sigh) YEARS of working with Ruby. In a way that's an argument FOR Ruby! It will only start to look ugly years after you work with it. ;) More than can be said for MANY other languages! So far I haven't seen too much "ugly" in Elixir (which is good, as it should be in the "beautiful bouncing baby" phase!). In fact, in some ways it's even more Rubylike than Ruby is, such as with being able to define your own sigils: http://elixir-lang.org/getting-started/sigils.html http://elixir-lang.org/getting-started/sigils.html And of course the macro facility is pretty much the ultimate definition of Ruby's oft-touted "metaprogramming." Chris McCord already has a book out on it, actually: http://smile.amazon.com/Metaprogramming-Elixir-Write-Less-Code/dp/1680500414?sa-no-redirect=1 http://smile.amazon.com/Metaprogramming-Elixir-Write-Less-Co...

pbowyer 11y ago

Thanks, that's a really helpful answer. > Again, there's taste and opinion here, of course. Coding has become awfully fashion-driven, of late. I agree and that's a really enlightened view. But I'm quite glad - it means the ecosystem is maturing if we now can be fashion driven, rather than having to care about "does it work?"

lectrick 11y ago
> Thanks, that's a really helpful answer. I really like this language, I've met Jose Valim and he's a super nice, super smart guy, as is Chris McCord. So I feel naturally motivated to promote it. Also, it's just lots of fun to work with! > it means the ecosystem is maturing if we now can be fashion driven, rather than having to care about "does it work?" Well in my case, as I said, I got tired of certain classes of Ruby bugs, and certain, shall we say, "uglinesses" which presented themselves, but only after (sigh) YEARS of working with Ruby. In a way that's an argument FOR Ruby! It will only start to look ugly years after you work with it. ;) More than can be said for MANY other languages! So far I haven't seen too much "ugly" in Elixir (which is good, as it should be in the "beautiful bouncing baby" phase!). In fact, in some ways it's even more Rubylike than Ruby is, such as with being able to define your own sigils: http://elixir-lang.org/getting-started/sigils.html http://elixir-lang.org/getting-started/sigils.html And of course the macro facility is pretty much the ultimate definition of Ruby's oft-touted "metaprogramming." Chris McCord already has a book out on it, actually: http://smile.amazon.com/Metaprogramming-Elixir-Write-Less-Code/dp/1680500414?sa-no-redirect=1 http://smile.amazon.com/Metaprogramming-Elixir-Write-Less-Co...