[erlang-questions] Binary string literal syntax

José Valim jose.valim@REDACTED
Wed Jun 6 08:37:07 CEST 2018

Right, all languages have syntax weirdness. And yes, Elixir has more
syntactical constructs than Erlang, even being much younger. But there is
still a very long way to become comparable to languages like C++ and Perl.
And if Erlang can avoid further syntax growth through discipline, I don’t
see any reason why Elixir can’t either. :)

Elixir was designed with a macro system and AST in mind, exactly so we can
have a core of constructs and derive everything else from this core. That’s
the reason why we haven’t added further syntax, because it was designed so
we don’t have to.

So I would be surprised if Elixir v2.0 includes more than a couple new
constructs, if any. The most likely chance of getting new constructs is
because Erlang got them too (say we got a new data type, like when we got

I am fully aware that 4 years is very little time to extract trends from
and guess about the future, but I am considerably more optimistic about how
this particular aspect of Elixir will grow over time.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20180606/1dfb772c/attachment.htm>

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list