I would imagine most people using gleam are aware. But it's not here yet, and will be implementing a novel type system with no major forerunners. I have very high confidence in the elixir folks, but still it's hard to estimate how quickly it will arrive and what its practical advantages and tradeoffs will be when it lands. Whereas ML type systems are venerable and proven, with well-understood contours and constraints and people have deep expertise at applying them to certain problems successfully.
So idk, I'll probably still keep an eye on gleam even once elixir has types. In a sense I think my ideal language would be like "rescript but for erlang instead of js" and typed elixir definitely isn't that. Gleam isn't quite that either but it's from the same neighborhood.
Yes I was trying to be careful not to say that the ML-type approach was better than the incoming typed elixir approach. Just that it has well-understood limitations and tradeoffs that people are already familiar with, which is an advantage in certain situations.
But, and I'm certainly not a type systems expert, I think something like ocaml 5's algebraic effects can model anything in beam? I'm not a beam expert either though so maybe I'm wrong. It might be unusably hairy though.
Anyway though again I have high confidence that elixir will come up with an excellent type system for elixir. But a project starting from a well-understood type system and building towards beam will get a different result and I think that's likely also valuable.
FYI the next big elixir launch is a gradual type system.