Live data from Hacker News

Elixir, Phoenix, Absinthe, GraphQL, React, and Apollo

schneider.dev

21–30 of 155 posts

Re: Elixir, Phoenix, Absinthe, GraphQL, React, and Apollo

#21

Good read. Curious about Elixir. Why would one use this over ‘plain old’ Erlang / OTP apart from the Rubyesque syntax, which might appeal to RoR devs?

Many folks seem to prefer Elixir to "Plain old Erlang" because for those who come from an imperative and / or object-oriented background, picking up Erlang means taking on a significantly steeper learning curve.

Re: Elixir, Phoenix, Absinthe, GraphQL, React, and Apollo

#22

Good read. Curious about Elixir. Why would one use this over ‘plain old’ Erlang / OTP apart from the Rubyesque syntax, which might appeal to RoR devs?

It's 100% the syntax. It appeals to ruby devs and also I think it's a lot easier to grok in general. But you can write Erlang code directly in an Elixir file, you can use Erlang libraries directly in Elixir, and Elixir compiles to the same BEAM instructions that Erlang does, so there's functionally no difference in terms of capabilities or what happens when they run.

well better unicode support too

Re: Elixir, Phoenix, Absinthe, GraphQL, React, and Apollo

#23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

rust is still figuring out async, so it's not as good a fit as say go or elixir. If you are specifically making a graphql backend, idk why you would anything but node, since it has the most mature ecosystem.

I mean actix just hit 1.0 and I don’t think it impacted them one bit.

The ecosystem is not really mature.

Re: Elixir, Phoenix, Absinthe, GraphQL, React, and Apollo

#24

Good read. Curious about Elixir. Why would one use this over ‘plain old’ Erlang / OTP apart from the Rubyesque syntax, which might appeal to RoR devs?

It's 100% the syntax. It appeals to ruby devs and also I think it's a lot easier to grok in general. But you can write Erlang code directly in an Elixir file, you can use Erlang libraries directly in Elixir, and Elixir compiles to the same BEAM instructions that Erlang does, so there's functionally no difference in terms of capabilities or what happens when they run.

This is not totally true. It’s not 100% syntax. Elixir has one additional and widely used feature: macros.

In Elixir, as in Lisp, you can transform your code as a data structure into new code. This is importantly used in Ecto, the de-facto object data mapper in Elixir. It’s also used in Absinthe, a library from the posted link for making GraphQL APIs.

Re: Elixir, Phoenix, Absinthe, GraphQL, React, and Apollo

#28
post #3
post #2

I've just been trying to get back into elixir recently, myself. I'd done some basic crud 'helloworld' stuff when I first tried about a year into professional development. I've since had the Fortune to spend time learning about cloud native apps, distributed service patterns, and supporting infrastructure (spring cloud, pcf, vanilla k8s, gcp) and now returning to elixir having at least better understanding of what erl…

If you're interested in the Phoenix Framework you should check out "Programming Phoenix: Productive |> Reliable |> Fast". It's written by the creator of Phoenix (Chris McCord) and the creator of Elixir (José Valim), and it's a fantastic intro to Phoenix.

Link: https://pragprog.com/book/phoenix14/programming-phoenix-1-4

Re: Elixir, Phoenix, Absinthe, GraphQL, React, and Apollo

#29
Does anyone here who is working with elixir professionally have a sense of what kind of mastery is needed to jump into an elixir dev role? I've used it on and off for ~4 years at this point and in a few side projects (most recent one using everything in the title, weirdly enough) but can't really tell if I'm "qualified" to look for a job in it. It's this weird loop of "I've only done something as a hobby so I'm not qualified to do it professionally" vs "If I don't use it professionally I'll never be qualified to do so".

Same goes for react.

Post reply on HN