11–20 of 33 posts
You've run into the same naming problem GM did with the Vauxhall/Opel Nova: "No Va" literally means some variant of "it doesn't go" in (at least) Italian, Spanish, and French.
Not sure how this hit the front page without linking the actual project. https://novaframework.org/
Could you compare/contrast Nova to Nitrogen?
I will check this out. Are you familiar with the Nitrogen framework? I've used it a bit and quite liked it, but not sure it's really an active project anymore. https://nitrogenproject.com/ Could you compare/contrast Nova to Nitrogen?
Why do you use Erlang instead of Elixir?
You've run into the same naming problem GM did with the Vauxhall/Opel Nova: "No Va" literally means some variant of "it doesn't go" in (at least) Italian, Spanish, and French.
And Uranus (when spoken aloud) means “your butt”. Is this really a big concern?
Edit: Uranus is Latin too :)
You've run into the same naming problem GM did with the Vauxhall/Opel Nova: "No Va" literally means some variant of "it doesn't go" in (at least) Italian, Spanish, and French.
[1]: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/chevrolet-nova-name-spanis...
[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Chevy_II_/_Nova
Why do you use Erlang instead of Elixir?
No rebinding, better fits the grain of the OTP, no AST macros. Last I checked, the debugging experience with elixir was pretty subpar. Erlang is also a fundamentally nicer syntax that I find a great deal more readable. I'm not really sure what the appeal of Elixir as a language is actually supposed to be, outside of people who have spent a lot of time writing Ruby code.
Why someone might like Elixir:
- slightly less crufty stdlib for a lot of the basic stuff (though we still use the Erlang stdlib all the time)
- the Elixir community started off using binaries instead of charlists so everything uses binaries
- great general collections libraries in the stdlib that operate on interfaces/protocols rather than concrete collections (Enum, Stream)
- macros allow for default impls and a good deal less boilerplate, great libraries like Phoenix and Ecto, and the community seems to be pretty judicious with their use
- protocols allow datatype polymorphism in a really nice way (I know about behaviours, they are also good)
- very standard build tool/project layout/generators that have been there from the start (Erlang has caught up here with rebar, it seems)
- a lot of high quality libraries for web stuff, specifically
- convenience stuff around common OTP patterns like Task, Task.Supervisor, Agent, etc.
> Last I checked, the debugging experience with elixir was pretty subpar.
Just curious, why is this? All of the Erlang debugging stuff seems to work.
You've run into the same naming problem GM did with the Vauxhall/Opel Nova: "No Va" literally means some variant of "it doesn't go" in (at least) Italian, Spanish, and French.
While this is a nice story, it's not true [1] [2]. [1]: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/chevrolet-nova-name-spanis... [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Chevy_II_/_Nova
Why do you use Erlang instead of Elixir?
No rebinding, better fits the grain of the OTP, no AST macros. Last I checked, the debugging experience with elixir was pretty subpar. Erlang is also a fundamentally nicer syntax that I find a great deal more readable. I'm not really sure what the appeal of Elixir as a language is actually supposed to be, outside of people who have spent a lot of time writing Ruby code.
Easy:
- rebinding
- higher-level OTP abstractions
- AST macros
- nicer, more readable syntax
- (optionally) cleaner stdlib