141–150 of 155 posts
It was elegant and clear!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The syntax is heavily inspired by Ruby.
Having written Elixir every day for the last 5 or 6 years, and Ruby for the 10 years before that I don't think it is.
The issue I have with the statement is that it pulls all of the negative connotations that some people have with Ruby onto Elixir...and Elixir is not at all like Ruby.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> people who've sought out similar model for its benefits, and could thrive with an offering that pays attention to these concerns throughout. I discovered BEAM while looking into a way to run concurrent, distributed Golang/gRPC services in a supervisor-worker set up. I've continued tinkering with OTP ever since. Edit: added quoted portion.
Did you find anything for the golang part?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> what could be changed in the ecosystem to support this goal? 1. Change the syntax. Elixir wasn't far enough. Not at all and BEAM doesn't need to know, so we have a chicken-egg problem of people entrenched don't want to spend time that will help the language and underlying strategies become more widely adopted. Perhaps this was the production feedback loop you were referencing. We still don't have a good methodology…
> Handling text is still awful in these languages. In contrast to what? Honestly just curious.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The syntax is heavily inspired by Ruby.
Having written Elixir every day for the last 5 or 6 years, and Ruby for the 10 years before that I don't think it is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I work with Ruby and Elixir daily and Elixir is 10x faster. Phoenix recently added functionality to display response times in microseconds, partially as a showcase for its good performance. I dont doubt you can get more performance in C++ or something but its still lighting compared to Ruby.
Phoenix is faster than Rails, however Ruby is faster than Elixir when doing CPU intensive tasks. Like parsing text.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Re: "Anyhow, from my POV the "average" programmers should GTFO and stop peeing in the pool. I would fire 90% of working programmers. They're not needed and actively counter-productive." This is the theory that the elite are so productive that they can replace say 10 non-elites. The main problem with this is that most problems to be automated (or upgraded) are not well-defined. It takes iterative interaction with anal…
I upvoted you because you're making good points, and graciously. Well met, sorry for being cranky. > This is the theory that the elite are so productive that they can replace say 10 non-elites. No no no, I'm saying that the non-elites are counter-productive, that they contribute negative productivity. (FWIW, I've met at least one "10x" in real life. He made his mark out of Uni by co-founding a company that made their…
You may have concrete examples of that, but I couldn't agree based on my own perspective/experience. I've worked on a team with an elite programmer (in terms of actual 10x productivity) for nearly 3 years now. I know they're not all the same, but this guy isn't particularly sophisticated or cerebral in his approach; in fact, he wouldn't want to take on architectural concerns, refactoring, or really complex problems - I and another dev take care of that. He's just incredibly productive, by any measure you'd like to use -- LOC contributed, modules written, features implemented, issues closed. I've sometimes wondered if he's a front for an entire team behind him.
That doesn't mean the rest of us aren't worth having on the team. We are definitely contributing positively. In fact, he couldn't work anywhere close to the rate he does if he had to take care of the stuff the rest of us do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I upvoted you because you're making good points, and graciously. Well met, sorry for being cranky. > This is the theory that the elite are so productive that they can replace say 10 non-elites. No no no, I'm saying that the non-elites are counter-productive, that they contribute negative productivity. (FWIW, I've met at least one "10x" in real life. He made his mark out of Uni by co-founding a company that made their…
> I'm saying that the non-elites are counter-productive, that they contribute negative productivity. You may have concrete examples of that, but I couldn't agree based on my own perspective/experience. I've worked on a team with an elite programmer (in terms of actual 10x productivity) for nearly 3 years now. I know they're not all the same, but this guy isn't particularly sophisticated or cerebral in his approach; i…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I upvoted you because you're making good points, and graciously. Well met, sorry for being cranky. > This is the theory that the elite are so productive that they can replace say 10 non-elites. No no no, I'm saying that the non-elites are counter-productive, that they contribute negative productivity. (FWIW, I've met at least one "10x" in real life. He made his mark out of Uni by co-founding a company that made their…
> I'm saying that the non-elites are counter-productive, that they contribute negative productivity. You may have concrete examples of that, but I couldn't agree based on my own perspective/experience. I've worked on a team with an elite programmer (in terms of actual 10x productivity) for nearly 3 years now. I know they're not all the same, but this guy isn't particularly sophisticated or cerebral in his approach; i…
The kind of people I'm talking about are not necessarily fast and they tend to leverage other people's abilities rather than shut them out.
Like Fabrice Bellard: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabrice_Bellard
Ridiculously sharp guy, and his work has enabled so much other stuff and so many other people, eh?
- - - -
No team of ten people could do what arcfide does, eh? It would all get bogged down in intercommunication, etc. We pay a price for programming with sub-elite programmers. Metaphorically, I'm trying to say that teams dragging stone blocks are hindering the adoption of the wheel. (I'm not trying to make stone-block-draggers feel bad, FWIW.)
Functional programming has too long of a learning curve to the average programmer. A language should be judged by how long it takes average programmers to become proficient in it, not the "Sheldon Cooper" types. In typical medium and large organizations, it's difficult keep being selective about programmer hiring. (There are org structural/political reasons that would take several paragraphs to explain.) This problem…
Hi there, I sometimes try to help normals relate to me by asking, "You know Sheldon Cooper from Big Bang Theory? I'm like a stupid, slighty-less-social-idiot Sheldon Cooper." I identify with Dr. Cooper. (BTW it sucks being like that. Don't ever think we do it because we like it. There are a few perks but it mostly sucks. Also, it's like living in "Idiocracy". I can't watch that movie because it's too painful. That's…