I personally experience Elixir's syntax to be quite deceptive in that, for me personally, it lures me into assuming Ruby semantics and th...
I personally experience Elixir's syntax to be quite deceptive in that, for me personally, it lures me into assuming Ruby semantics and this just makes it feel uncanny. It feels noisier in general and as if I lose some of the homoiconic feeling I get from Erlang where matching on literal data types is essential and can lead to very concise code. I know that a lot of people find Erlang's syntax to be a pain point (I don't, I actually like it), but as a unique language it helps to have a fitting syntax that's easy on the mind for context switching to and from. And I'd say it's quite perfectly optimized for a language whose backbone is terms, processes and pattern matching. It's also far less learning than most other functional languages, quite frankly. It probably has a lot to do with its culture that sees the FP aspect as a tool that fits into the paradigm of solving engineering problems related to high availability distributed systems, rather than FP being the end itself, although we need both kinds of languages. But hey, anything to get BEAM into the spotlight is probably a good thing. I'd just prefer if it was pure Erlang.
Posted by vezzy-fnord on Apr 14, 2015, 5:13 PM
Tags
Related issues
- I mean that's the problem though.
- I've always believed the opposite: get conditionals deep in your code so that the higher level control flow is regular.
- The biggest problem with AI isn't being able to do things.
- I am a 3D printing maker type nerd (I make my own tools for other creative tasks, rather than as their own outcomes) and I saw an incredi...
- Of course not, those are clearly scams.
- Claude makes more detailed plans that seem better if you just skim them, but when analyzed, has a lot of errors, usually.
Raise real-world problems, find people facing the same issue, and discuss solutions.7,000 issues0 comments
hackernews (EdTech)
I mean that's the problem though.
I've always believed the opposite: get conditionals deep in your code so that the higher level control flow is regular.
The biggest problem with AI isn't being able to do things.
I am a 3D printing maker type nerd (I make my own tools for other creative tasks, rather than as their own outcomes) and I saw an incredi...
Of course not, those are clearly scams.
Claude makes more detailed plans that seem better if you just skim them, but when analyzed, has a lot of errors, usually.
Effectively everyone is building the same tools with zero quantitative benchmarks or evidence behind the why / ideas … this entire s...
> creating and operating a small company in Germany is a nightmare To be fair, I think the problem operating in Germany is its federated...
I personally experience Elixir's syntax to be quite deceptive in that, for me personally, it lures me into assuming Ruby semantics and th...
I personally experience Elixir's syntax to be quite deceptive in that, for me personally, it lures me into assuming Ruby semantics and this just makes it feel uncanny. It feels noisier in general and as if I lose some of the homoiconic feeling I get from Erlang where matching on literal data types is essential and can lead to very concise code. I know that a lot of people find Erlang's syntax to be a pain point (I don't, I actually like it), but as a unique language it helps to have a fitting syntax that's easy on the mind for context switching to and from. And I'd say it's quite perfectly optimized for a language whose backbone is terms, processes and pattern matching. It's also far less learning than most other functional languages, quite frankly. It probably has a lot to do with its culture that sees the FP aspect as a tool that fits into the paradigm of solving engineering problems related to high availability distributed systems, rather than FP being the end itself, although we need both kinds of languages. But hey, anything to get BEAM into the spotlight is probably a good thing. I'd just prefer if it was pure Erlang.
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Start the discussion.