Comment by zwnow

3 months ago

I'd also throw Erlang/Elixir out there. And I really wished Elm wasn't such a trainwreck of a project...

8 comments

zwnow

What is the most optimal Erlang/Elixir you can think of regarding standardized effect systems for recording non-determinism, replaying and reversible computing? How comparable are performance numbers of Erlang/Elixir with Java and wasm?

zwnow 3 months ago

I'd recommend asking the Elixir community about this as I didn't even understand your question. I am by no means a professional with Erlang/Elixir. I threw it out there because these language force you to think differently compared to common OOP languages.

59nadir 3 months ago

No need to include Elixir here; none of the important bits that will change how you view software come from Elixir, it's just a skin on top of Erlang (+ some standard library wrappers) and that's it.

zwnow 3 months ago
I'd argue more people use Elixir over Erlang at this point. Sure its just an abstraction on top of Erlang, but people learn through Elixir nowadays, not through Erlang.
- 59nadir 3 months ago
  
  If you want to learn the actual mind changing aspects of the BEAM, clearly learning the simpler, smaller language with a more direct route to the juice is the way to go. Hence Erlang, not Elixir. I learned Elixir first back in 2015, and then learned Erlang, and have had the pleasure of using both in production. When all was said and done I really think Erlang was better, especially over a long enough time frame.
  As a general point I'd like to state that I don't think it really matters what "people" do when you're learning for yourself. In the grand scheme of things approximately no one uses the BEAM, but this doesn't mean that learning how to use it is somehow pointless.
  
  3 replies →