121–130 of 426 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Java has the JVM the same way that Elixir has Beam/OTP/...
And CPython runs Python bytecode, which is basically running in a Python virtual machine. I am not sure what GP is objecting to.
Elixir always felt like it would be a solid functional systems programming language, so not having a compiled backend is a genuine downside.
Maybe it is only my experience, but i feel that languages that were not typed since the begining never work as well as "true" typed ones.
seems ironic that critics were saying, it needs typing, and all the elixir fans were saying you don't need typing, you don't get bugs related to typing because elixir is somehow magic, now they get typing and it finds bugs for them.... but you said you didn't need that to prevent bugs? But good to see! I spent a bunch of time trying out Elixir a while back, I enjoyed it, but just didn't agree with the lack of types.
This is the Goomba fallacy. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Goomba_fallacy
I've seen internet commenters say China is overstating its economic numbers to look more intimidating, and that China is understating its economic numbers to receive more favourable WTO trading terms, but somehow these two camps never called each other out, which makes me think they're the same people believing that China is both overstating and understating.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think Elixir is interesting and there is real value but some stuff being sold as "all these libs/packages that haven't had any updates for over a year is fine because Elixir" I just don't buy it and to that point around typing feels like the same wish-washy hand waving from the community that is very off putting BEAM has genuine use cases but its not as wide as its made to believe. There are very good places where…
So you prefer language communities where libraries have a constant stream of fixes, new breaking change releases every six months and entirely new framework ecosystems ascending every three years?
Or even that, the very same ecosystem congratulates themselves on the typing system but still relies on linters because the language and runtime themselves allow whole categories of dumb ideas to be written?
in the agent of agents this will probably give us a big boost though so thankyou Elixir team
Maybe it is only my experience, but i feel that languages that were not typed since the begining never work as well as "true" typed ones.
seems ironic that critics were saying, it needs typing, and all the elixir fans were saying you don't need typing, you don't get bugs related to typing because elixir is somehow magic, now they get typing and it finds bugs for them.... but you said you didn't need that to prevent bugs? But good to see! I spent a bunch of time trying out Elixir a while back, I enjoyed it, but just didn't agree with the lack of types.
I think Elixir is interesting and there is real value but some stuff being sold as "all these libs/packages that haven't had any updates for over a year is fine because Elixir" I just don't buy it and to that point around typing feels like the same wish-washy hand waving from the community that is very off putting BEAM has genuine use cases but its not as wide as its made to believe. There are very good places where…
Maybe it is only my experience, but i feel that languages that were not typed since the begining never work as well as "true" typed ones.
I've experienced this, but it's mostly because languages like Python and TypeScript give you way too many escape hatches. I get the intent: allow devs to convert their code base slowly. But in practice it just lets developers opt out of the benefits of typing to "save time" in the short run.
I used to be a bit of a pragmatist when it comes to strict mode, but over the years that has subsided, nowadays I think it is plainly obvious that all Typescript programs should use strict mode unless there's a damn good reason. And I'm not sure there are any legitimate damn good reasons.
True there is no ability to forbid an explicit-any type declaration, though.
seems ironic that critics were saying, it needs typing, and all the elixir fans were saying you don't need typing, you don't get bugs related to typing because elixir is somehow magic, now they get typing and it finds bugs for them.... but you said you didn't need that to prevent bugs? But good to see! I spent a bunch of time trying out Elixir a while back, I enjoyed it, but just didn't agree with the lack of types.
> you don't get bugs related to typing because elixir is somehow magic, I've never followed Elixir particularly closely, but what I saw in some Erlang discussions was different. Discourse there was that you need to gracefully handle failure anyhow, so type errors can (should?) just get handled by the failure recovery machinery you're supposed to have anyhow. I disagree with that point of view, but it's much more defe…
Maybe it is only my experience, but i feel that languages that were not typed since the begining never work as well as "true" typed ones.