astrowilson

4 ms·

1.
by astrowilson 5y ago
You may not believe this, but there are other ways of versioning software beyond breaking things every year and doing whatever Python 3 did.
2.
by astrowilson 5y ago
That’s precisely my point. With Rails and Ruby breaking APIs on every new minor release, the only realistic expectation is that every minor release of anything may have breaking changes, because that’s the example being set. And it just mak
3.
by astrowilson 5y ago
It won’t cause a uproar because Ruby/Rails changes APIs on minor versions all the time. Breaking changes are pushed at a yearly rate and everyone is just expected to cope with them.
4.
by astrowilson 5y ago
It definitely has something to do with Ruby and Rails. Ruby and Rails introduces API changes on minor versions all the time, sometimes even without prior warnings, so people shouldn’t expect related gems to be any different.
5.
by astrowilson 5y ago
> This type of library API breaking change on a minor version update basically never happens. Literally happens all the time with Rails. To the point they decided to call their versioning schema “shifted semver” to afford themselves API
6.
by astrowilson 5y ago
Not sure I agree on Phoenix. There are macros, but only around plugs and routing, not much different to what you’d find in Django and definitely less magic than Rails. Plugs are straightforward function pipelines and a declarative DSL reall
7.
by astrowilson 5y ago
That’s only an issue if you define your career by a single programming language... I don’t. Regarding bills, I made my biggest salary bump after I jumped to Elixir, but I appreciate the concern.
8.
by astrowilson 5y ago
You keep bringing up “Elixir has peaked” but you don’t provide any concrete evidence for that. The only mention so far is Stack Overflow, which is not used by the community, and such was explained to you on separate occasions. Someone menti
9.
by astrowilson 5y ago
So what is your action plan? To keep commenting that Elixir is niche on many threads even though most people here aren’t saying otherwise? And even if they think that’s true, do you think being antagonistic to them on forums is what is goin
10.
by astrowilson 5y ago
I can’t reply directly to the comment below yours, so it will be as a side comment. I don’t think anyone is arguing Elixir isn’t niche, we are just explaining why Elixir gets attention on HN even though it is top 50 on TIOBE. HN itself is f
11.
by astrowilson 5y ago
Not yet. It only supports Elixir for now (there is an issue for supporting other languages) and the notebook formats are different, so someone would also need to write a nbconvert to Markdown (.livemd).
12.
by astrowilson 6y ago
I accept that my original sentence was unclear. I mentioned more punctuation characters in the context of conciseness, which obviously takes the amount of characters into account. Other than that, I don’t dispute Erlang has less syntax and
13.
by astrowilson 6y ago
The example that you picked and wrote translates to this in Erlang: lists:sort( fun(X, Y) -> byte_size(X) < byte_size(Y) end, [<<"some">>, <<"kind">>, <<"of&quot
14.
by astrowilson 6y ago
That’s not a representative example of none of the languages. It is also just plain invalid for Elixir. I recommend checking actual code examples on their websites to form a better opinion.
15.
by astrowilson 6y ago
Your Elixir example is literally wrong. It won’t compile unless you do many changes. You are keeping -> instead do. You are still using commas after each expression. The fn syntax is wrong and also using parens for args. So you forgot to
16.
by astrowilson 6y ago
The 3+ years ago is a good reference, thanks for sharing. The issue could also be Ecto related. Ecto 3, which might not have been out at the time, had a bunch of improvements on this front.
17.
by astrowilson 6y ago
> and perhaps there could be a more concise enhancement of Erlang which would get the job done Erlang already is a more concise language than Elixir but also noisier as there are more punctuation characters. I would love if Erlang would
18.
by astrowilson 6y ago
It is still global. Typing collections and instance/class variables help, you can optionally type methods, but anything that is not explicitly typed is going to be inferred during invocation and that needs to happen based on all caller
19.
by astrowilson 6y ago
It depends on what you mean by mainstream and by large company but Clojure, Elixir, and Elm are all languages that are frequently on HN and they were either personal projects or backed by small companies (<40 employees). I think Julia to
20.
by astrowilson 6y ago
They haven’t backed off from global inference. They did move to require you to type collections, but methods are not inferred at definition but rather at invocation and it happens globally. There is no solution really. If you want a languag