
Elixir v1.8 released - _asummers
https://elixir-lang.org/blog/2019/01/14/elixir-v1-8-0-released/
======
losvedir
Maybe a better link: [https://elixir-
lang.org/blog/2019/01/14/elixir-v1-8-0-releas...](https://elixir-
lang.org/blog/2019/01/14/elixir-v1-8-0-released/) . One thing about that blog
post that really caught my eye:

> _There is only one last major feature planned for upcoming Elixir versions,
> which is the addition of mix release to Elixir itself, streamlining the
> experience provided by packages like distillery._

Aside from having native support for releases, which would be killer, I was
really struck by the idea that the language will be basically "finished". You
rarely see that in software these days, but I think there's a lot to be said
for trying to get to that point.

~~~
Djvacto
Being that the language is user-extensible, where do you see it going in the
future? Will "finished" mean feature-complete, or will we see anything worth
incorporating into the language?

This isn't directed specifically at you, but to anyone who might have ideas.

~~~
hdra
The Elixir team took a deliberate step to limit the features built into the
language itself, and prefer non-core solutions developed as external packages
instead.

For example, they recently scrapped plans on building property testing into
the language core.

Which is something I find very refreshing, TBH, having worked with the JS
ecosystem, I somehow find this approach to be rather relieving for some
reason.

------
salimmadjd
Congrats on continuous progress of the team.

But I have a question. I took an online Erlang class and I actually ended up
really liking the Erlang syntax once I got used to it. To me now, Erlang is
now far more readable than Elixir.

I understand Elixir is designed for the Rubyist, but I'm curious how is the
experience of others who have looked at both Erlang and Elixir.

~~~
digitalzombie
Elixir have better syntax because it's familiar.

I did play around with Erlang a few time. I really love the comma and period.
It really nest and group the function patterns together.

For Elixir you just have to put them near each other. The function are enclose
in a do/end block. And you put those similar pattern function next to each
other. I believe you can move those pattern function around.

Other than that I can't recall much else. Prolog syntax is foreign but I'll
admit I can see myself learning Erlang pretty fast since the language isn't
"big" compare to Java or Scala. Like wise Elixir is a small language too with
added macro (I don't recall Erlang got this) feature. Elixir also have better
tooling baked in (mix/hex, doc, lint, etc...).

Also the Erlang community sucks. This is my personal experience but I vividly
recall attending a meetup. The group meetup have a discussion about Erlang's
adoption and how to get better adoption. I told them Ruby got popular because
RoR other wise people would have chose Python and call it a day. Erlang should
really have a killer framework like a web framework. Everybody thought it was
ridiculous.

And you know what? Elixir came along and so did Phoenix. Phoenix may not be
the only thing that got Elixir popular, Elixir got toolings from the get go.
Jose and those people are from the industry they know what was needed. They
came from Ruby.

~~~
filmor
> Elixir have better syntax because it's familiar.

Which syntax is "better" depends on how you measure. I'm a big fan of Erlang's
"minimalistic" syntax. It means I might have to write a bit more code, but it
also means that the code, once written, is very explicit.

> Like wise Elixir is a small language too with added macro (I don't recall
> Erlang got this) feature.

Well, Erlang does have simple macros (-define(MACRO(Var1, Var2), {some_expr,
#{ var1 => Var1, var2 => Var2 }}).) but they are nowhere near as powerful as
Elixir's system. There is merl
([http://erlang.org/doc/man/merl.html](http://erlang.org/doc/man/merl.html))
which allows for something quite similar, in particular if it's combined with
parse transforms. I haven't used it and haven't seen usage in the wild,
though.

> Elixir also have better tooling baked in (mix/hex, doc, lint, etc...).

That I give you, while rebar3 is already a huge step forward compared to what
we had before, mix's out-of-the-box feature-set is really nice.

> Also the Erlang community sucks. This is my personal experience but I
> vividly recall attending a meetup. The group meetup have a discussion about
> Erlang's adoption and how to get better adoption. I told them Ruby got
> popular because RoR other wise people would have chose Python and call it a
> day. Erlang should really have a killer framework like a web framework.
> Everybody thought it was ridiculous.

This is a bit harsh. You can't derive "community sucks" from "the ones at this
meetup didn't share my opinion". I don't share it either. I think the main
thing holding Erlang back is the current out-of-the-box tooling (rebar3 is not
included in the OTP distribution) and its general performance.

