Getting started with Erlang: a new way to look at Erlang's syntax
1–10 of 15 posts
Re: Getting started with Erlang: a new way to look at Erlang's syntax
#2It's funny, I set out to learn Erlang this year, but ended up learning Elixir first. A lot of people go to great lengths to assure that Elixir is not the "CoffeeScript of Erlang" (which I do understand refers to more than just syntax improvements), but I found the opposite. After getting used to Elixir syntax, Erlang seems aesthetically much more elegant.
Re: Getting started with Erlang: a new way to look at Erlang's syntax
#3I never understood why Erlang syntax has been so commonly maligned. I had no trouble getting through Joe Armstrong's Programming Erlang in less than a week, and the syntax never required any conscious moment to "click," it just flowed right past. The only exception at first was the operator precedence rules inherited from Prolog, but those are memorized quickly.
I also didn't have in-depth prior experiences to non-ALGOL languages all that substantively. I had experimented with Scheme, OCaml and REBOL (and read documents on Prolog, but barely typed much of it) before, but nothing fancy.
Re: Getting started with Erlang: a new way to look at Erlang's syntax
#4It's funny, I set out to learn Erlang this year, but ended up learning Elixir first. A lot of people go to great lengths to assure that Elixir is not the "CoffeeScript of Erlang" (which I do understand refers to more than just syntax improvements), but I found the opposite. After getting used to Elixir syntax, Erlang seems aesthetically much more elegant.
Opposite experience here. Having learned Erlang first, I find Elixir's syntax to be a false friend for the semantics of the ERTS. Erlang's syntax also seems to me much better at getting out of your way and focusing on the primacy of patterns.
Re: Getting started with Erlang: a new way to look at Erlang's syntax
#5I never understood why Erlang syntax has been so commonly maligned. I had no trouble getting through Joe Armstrong's Programming Erlang in less than a week, and the syntax never required any conscious moment to "click," it just flowed right past. The only exception at first was the operator precedence rules inherited from Prolog, but those are memorized quickly. I also didn't have in-depth prior experiences to non-AL…
I think that generalizing from your own personal experience is probably a bad idea here. I personally learn syntax very easily probably because I place very little emphasis on syntax and far more on semantics. However I have met people who place a lot of emphasis on syntax. For them the syntax of a language is a large hindrance.
I suspect there are people for whom syntax has a large impact on productivity. Especially when first getting familiar with a language. I don't think downplaying that is wise.
Re: Getting started with Erlang: a new way to look at Erlang's syntax
#6I never understood why Erlang syntax has been so commonly maligned. I had no trouble getting through Joe Armstrong's Programming Erlang in less than a week, and the syntax never required any conscious moment to "click," it just flowed right past. The only exception at first was the operator precedence rules inherited from Prolog, but those are memorized quickly. I also didn't have in-depth prior experiences to non-AL…
I think that generalizing from your own personal experience is probably a bad idea here. I personally learn syntax very easily probably because I place very little emphasis on syntax and far more on semantics. However I have met people who place a lot of emphasis on syntax. For them the syntax of a language is a large hindrance. I suspect there are people for whom syntax has a large impact on productivity. Especially…
The point is Erlang's syntax is something of a joke for whatever reason, so I figured I'd offer a counterexample.
Honestly I see it as just slightly less juvenile than "Lost In Stupid Parentheses".
Re: Getting started with Erlang: a new way to look at Erlang's syntax
#7It's funny, I set out to learn Erlang this year, but ended up learning Elixir first. A lot of people go to great lengths to assure that Elixir is not the "CoffeeScript of Erlang" (which I do understand refers to more than just syntax improvements), but I found the opposite. After getting used to Elixir syntax, Erlang seems aesthetically much more elegant.
I have been learning and using Erlang for quite sometime and it's syntax was one of the attractive part for me, short and concise. But it has always confused me why people keep praising Elixir for the break through they made with its syntax !
Re: Getting started with Erlang: a new way to look at Erlang's syntax
#8Erlang's syntax really is really really easy... its just different enough that it causes fence jumping when switching languages
Re: Getting started with Erlang: a new way to look at Erlang's syntax
#9It's funny, I set out to learn Erlang this year, but ended up learning Elixir first. A lot of people go to great lengths to assure that Elixir is not the "CoffeeScript of Erlang" (which I do understand refers to more than just syntax improvements), but I found the opposite. After getting used to Elixir syntax, Erlang seems aesthetically much more elegant.
Well it isn't just the CoffeeScript of Erlang for reasons like having better string implementation, macros, subjectively better additions to standard library, protocols, etc...
Whether those reasons are significant enough for you to use Elixir over Erlang are another matter, but it wouldn't be classified as just another CoffeeScript when compared honestly.
Re: Getting started with Erlang: a new way to look at Erlang's syntax
#10It's funny, I set out to learn Erlang this year, but ended up learning Elixir first. A lot of people go to great lengths to assure that Elixir is not the "CoffeeScript of Erlang" (which I do understand refers to more than just syntax improvements), but I found the opposite. After getting used to Elixir syntax, Erlang seems aesthetically much more elegant.
Basically this happened to me as well. I was interested in learning Erlang just because it was something different then the plethora of common languages we see and use everyday. But when Phoenix v1.0 was released I jumped on that. It was an interesting experience; I felt like I was working with Rails even though I wasn't. Needless to say, it completely distracted me from actually learning Erlang.