New EEP draft: Pinning operator ^ in patterns
Sat Jan 23 10:33:15 CET 2021
On 2021/01/23 18:24, Nicolas Martyanoff wrote:
> On 2021-01-23 17:36, zxq9 wrote:
>> For example: The continued and *exclusive* focus on making everything be a
>> release is damaging to adoption. It is just one more hurdle for newcomers
>> and makes some things nearly impossible to do. Releases are very important
>> for certain environments, but not a good fit for general programming.
> It is a bit off-topic, but I believe there is such a focus on releases because
> there is nothing else.
> Looking back at my experience with Erlang, and watching friends starting with
> it, the most painful part was never the syntax, it was always about the tooling.
> I like to joke about Go, but for all its faults, basic tooling is there and it
Go's tooling was a big part of the motivation for my Erlang toolkit.
# Create a project:
$ zx create project
# then follow the prompts ...
# Run a program if it exists in a zomp realm already:
$ zx run [program name] [args]
# Run a project from its project dir
$ zx runlocal [args]
# Run a project from a different dir
$ zx rundir [path] [args]
If you do "zxh" instead of "zx" then you get an Erlang shell with it,
which is nice sometimes.
I'm not very big on self-promotion, but I think this is really the
direction to go. One magical thing is how well it works cross platform,
too, which is great. I can write a tetris clone on Linux at the office
and immediately my daughter can run it at home on any other system.
Here is a tutorial I made about doing exactly that, actually:
Anyway, I don't expect any rush of people to suddenly use ZX -- that's
not the point. My point is that something *like* this is really the way
to make Erlang more adoptable, by changing the context of its use, not
changing the language itself. I've found that Erlang is a *lot* easier
to teach to kids than just about anything other than Scheme.
More information about the erlang-questions