josevalim

43 ms·

451.
by josevalim 15y ago
I believe I could optimize all three scenarios by configuring the webservers, VMs and so forth. That is not the point here though so I decided to go with out of the box experience.
452.
by josevalim 15y ago
Yup, they never are. :) But I will try with the keep alive flag later, thanks. I need to find some time to build something more relevant, put it on EC2 and then benchmark it properly.
453.
by josevalim 15y ago
Yes, Frankie is using both cores. I am passing the flag "production" to all three libraries but not doing any further customization to the underlying VM/engine/webserver.
454.
A (successful) git branching model(blog.plataformatec.com.br)
1 points by josevalim 16y ago|0 comments
455.
Why Rubyists should try Elixir(blog.plataformatec.com.br)
5 points by josevalim 16y ago|1 comments
456.
by josevalim 16y ago
There is one key difference right now: Elixir is much better documented. Elixir also has a well defined Object Model which helps a lot understanding what is going on and makes meta programming easier. I also find Elixir data structure's syn
457.
by josevalim 16y ago
1) About mixins and prototypes, exactly. 2) Yes, adding a syntax to easily change instance variable values is one of the most asked features. The tricky part is, we cannot do the following: @foo = "bar" Because that is pattern matc
458.
by josevalim 16y ago
No, no. Monkey patching is what you can do when you have open classes. For instance, in Ruby, I can reopen the Array class and add new behavior or change existent methods. This is obviously bad idea if you are changing native behavior, but
459.
by josevalim 16y ago
I'm glad that you found the syntax reasonable as a whole. :D Regarding to functions and atoms, their syntax choices are a trade-off. If I have "(x, y) -> x + y" for functions, I need explicit parens when invoking a method (otherwise we
460.
by josevalim 16y ago
It is "module_eval", which is not the same eval as Scheme, Javascript or Clojure. It means to evaluate the code in the context of a given module, allowing you to dynamically define new methods. The old regular eval is also available.
461.
[Screencast] Elixir: Object Orientation and charming syntax on top of Erlang(blog.plataformatec.com.br)
34 points by josevalim 16y ago|11 comments
462.
by josevalim 16y ago
Thanks jerf for your feedback even though it was based on rapidly reading the document. I will address a few things: 1) In general I am trying my best to not change the syntax for Erlang data structures. Atoms were one of the few exceptions
463.
by josevalim 16y ago
From the article: "- 13 x 10 % => 130 " That was a silly mistake in the README. I just fixed it, thanks for pointing it out.
464.
Elixir: Simple Object Orientation and charming syntax on top of Erlang(github.com)
52 points by josevalim 16y ago|6 comments
465.
Understanding the latest Rails benchmarks(blog.plataformatec.com.br)
30 points by josevalim 16y ago|3 comments
466.
by josevalim 16y ago
Things like convention over configuration must still exist. All the whistles and surprises that you get when you first come to Rails must still be there. What the blog post advocates is for giving good explanations, books, documentation ins
467.
by josevalim 16y ago
I agree with you. I had the post a bit longer but I cut it down a bit before publishing and it discussed some points you mentioned. People had reasons to call Rails as something "magic" some time ago. But "magic" at that time really transla