[Erlang Forums] [Erlang/OTP Proposals/Proposals: RFC] Re-visiting EEP-0055

Stanislav Ledenev s.ledenev@REDACTED
Mon Apr 25 18:43:47 CEST 2022

There were multiple arguments from a bunch of people.
The principle of the main one is "Render unto Caesar the things that are
Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's".
 If you like Elixir no one objects on this. Just leave Erlang alone.

But you just could not or don't want to listen.
Perhaps because you are a fanboy not an engineer if you can't see such
simple arguments.
And It's pointless to argue to argue with fanboys.

пн, 25 апр. 2022 г. в 18:14, Austin Ziegler <halostatue@REDACTED>:

> On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 10:58 AM Stanislav Ledenev <s.ledenev@REDACTED>
> wrote:
>> One question - why? Just because we can?
>> Erlang is doomed, Sorry Joe, we f**d things up.
> I really can’t help but laugh at over the top reactions like this and
> those who can’t help but bash Elixir because they don’t like the syntax.
> What if this syntax (or some other syntax) helps the compiler generate
> better (safer, faster, *whatever*) code? How would anyone know unless it
> gets tried? Why would anyone want to try it when they know that a certain
> vocal subset of the community are going to be pitching embarrassing fits
> over it?
> If this is introduced in OTP 26, then stop upgrading. Seriously. Stay on
> OTP 25 or before. But seriously, stop acting like children about this and
> saying that things are fucked up (because they’re not; you just don’t like
> this because you don’t like it). The only *real* objection that I’ve seen
> that makes sense to me is from Loïc, which is that it might be better to
> enable *annotations*, even if the only annotation initially available is
> for pinning. (My personal feeling on the annotation concept is that `^pin
> Variable` doesn’t feel right to me, but maybe `^pin:Variable` or
> `^pin{Variable}` or `^{pin}Variable` or something else, although more
> sigil-y, would be clearer.
> I mostly use Elixir, but often read Erlang codebases. On the Elixir core
> mailing list, there are frequent redirects to approach something as a
> possible PR to Erlang/OTP because it’s something that should benefit all
> BEAM languages.
> Telemetry started as an Elixir library, but was quickly changed to a pure
> Erlang approach because it makes more sense to be something that all BEAM
> languages can use.
> Elixir has — and I suspect both LFE and Gleam both have — *enhanced *the
> BEAM through wider exposure, code contributions, and other contributions.
> If you can’t argue a feature request like in this EEP on its merits (or
> lack thereof) without trying to bash Elixir, then maybe you don’t actually
> have an argument, but an emotional outburst, and should just *discard* your
> rant after writing it.
> -a
> --
> Austin Ziegler • halostatue@REDACTEDaustin@REDACTED
> http://www.halostatue.ca/http://twitter.com/halostatue
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20220425/cb1c6be7/attachment.htm>

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list