[erlang-questions] Re: erlang improvement - objective c (or smalltalk) syntax

Tony Arcieri tony@REDACTED
Sat Jun 6 08:52:26 CEST 2009

On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 9:12 AM, Jachym Holecek <freza@REDACTED> wrote:

> Consulting documentation is inevitable... And if the programming
> environment you're using makes access to documentation pretty much
> immediate, it doesn't really interrupt anything.

If you were learning a natural language, and had to constantly consult a
pocket reference, would you really consider yourself fluent in that

In a language like Ruby, I might consult the documentation on the core
types/modules once a month, if that.  I know how they work and can use them
fluently.  With Erlang, it feels more like I'm consulting the documentation
on the core types/BIFs at least once per programming session, if not many,
many times.

For doing basic day-to-day tasks in a programming language if I find myself
constantly consulting documentation about the core types to me that implies
that the core types are too hard to use for whatever reason.

> > Frankly I'm surprised by the amount of resistance I'm seeing here.
>  Keyword
> > arguments are wildly popular in languages like Objective C, Python, and
> Ruby
> > (although the latter only has faux keyword arguments).
> That doesn't really prove anything, does it?

It's a feature that's wildly popular among certain communities of
programmers.  Take that for what you will.

Tony Arcieri

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list