[erlang-questions] Any Erlang Devs Contemplating Elixir?
Tue Mar 1 16:42:20 CET 2016
Yes, please get this off list, this is more disgusting than I ever
thought Scott Adams (who I thought was disgusting already) would be.
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016, at 08:57 AM, Loïc Hoguin wrote:
> One of them. He's been writing a lot about this, especially in the past
> 8-9 months. He's predicted nearly all the US Republican primaries so far
> and has been writing extensively about it, explaining everything in
> details. Very instructing. Highlights a lot about human behavior.
> Anyway this is off-topic so feel free to email me off-list.
> On 03/01/2016 03:30 PM, Siraaj Khandkar wrote:
> > Brilliant analysis, Loïc!
> > Is this the Scott Adams post you're referring to?
> > http://blog.dilbert.com/post/136950092871/why-would-a-man-vote-for-hillary-clinton
> > Which is also quite brilliant in its observations - thanks for the pointer!
> > On 2/27/16 6:28 AM, Loïc Hoguin wrote:
> >> On 02/26/2016 09:21 PM, José Valim wrote:
> >>> But I may not be representative. Last time I counted I've
> >>> used around 40 languages in anger over the years, yet
> >>> I find Ruby bewildering.
> >>> I am not sure Ruby is relevant here. Elixir is not Ruby (and it could
> >>> never be in the Erlang VM). Elixir also isn't about Ruby syntax (the
> >>> same way Erlang isn't about Prolog syntax).
> >> Rationally, Elixir is not Ruby, and Erlang isn't Prolog. Irrationally,
> >> it is. Elixir has the same look and feel as Ruby, and Erlang has the
> >> same look and feel as Prolog.
> >> When Ruby developers look at Elixir they feel right at home. If you call
> >> yourself a Ruby developer, then you identify with certain values from
> >> Ruby, many of which can be found in Elixir. It's familiar. Again, we are
> >> on the irrational level here.
> >> Same goes for Erlang and Prolog. In fact a few days ago a few long-time
> >> Prolog developers pointed out the exact same thing when they were
> >> talking about Erlang. There is this familiarity that smoothes them in,
> >> even though the languages are fundamentally different.
> >> The thing is, if you have to convince large groups of people, you need
> >> to appeal to their irrational mind. As Scott Adams brilliantly pointed
> >> out, identity beats analogy beats reason. If you want to convince people
> >> to come to Elixir, you need to appeal to their identity, which is why
> >> targeting Ruby on Rails developers is your best bet. If you don't then
> >> you're just wasting valuable time and resources.
> >> I've pointed out a few years ago that Elixir was for Ruby developers. I
> >> didn't know why at the time. If you look at the most recent survey
> >> (http://blog.elixirsips.com/2015/12/21/elixir-users-survey-2015/), you
> >> can see that Ruby developers dominate. Other languages are little more
> >> than a statistical anomaly. Clearly you bring in a lot more Ruby
> >> developers than any other combined, and the reason for that is identity.
> >> Stop fighting it. Use it to bring more people in.
> > _______________________________________________
> > erlang-questions mailing list
> > http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
> Loïc Hoguin
> Author of The Erlanger Playbook,
> A book about software development using Erlang
> erlang-questions mailing list
More information about the erlang-questions