Hacker News Reader

Comment by 0b01 | Hacker News Reader

I don't find this useful in any way since Elixir is weakly typed and a worse Lisp than Python..

First: Elixir has strong dynamic typing. JavaScript has weak dynamic typing.

Second: As someone who uses Elixir for their day job, Racket for PL research, and Python for some CS classes, I can state with 100% confidence that Elixir is much closer to Lisp than Python. Elixir has macros that operate on the level of abstract syntax trees! Indeed, I think that is how most of this project was implemented.

How exactly is Elixir "a worse Lisp than Python"?

Elixir is a functional language and it even has Lisp-style macros.

deleted

douches get downvotes

https://games.greggman.com/game/dynamic-typing-static-typing...

The hard evidence that static typing is an overall-win is lacking. Period.

or, more succinctly,

https://i.imgur.com/zbU1wwH.jpg

how is static typing lacking evidence? don't we use that in rust to prevent the existence of large swaths of errors vs say C? i know for sure when turning on typescript for some javascript projects at work we found many issues, those all seem like wins? Why when I look at some dynamic languages say for example clojure i see stuff like type annotations in their core libraries, and then spec's to help provide a lot of what a type system can do? do you have maybe a counter argument to this fellow https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTl7Jn_kmio

The usual things that are brought up in this kind of HN thread are that studies don't show an advantage in delivered software, and tradeoffs / limitations of type systems are bad tradeoffs, and the vast majority of things caught by static type systems are trivial errors that are easily caught anyway, and that these days a lot of interfaces are APIs between systems that the static type systems don't cover anyway.

Thanks for the interesting sounding talk link. It's "Types are like the Weather, Type Systems are like Weathermen - Matthias Felleisen" from ClojureTV, for those who rarely click on youtube links. Mathias Felleisen a well known Racket guy, author of How to Design Programs, etc.

It probably helps in Rust.

Perhaps it helps more in certain specific languages or contexts.

The studies found no general “overall cost” improvement; in other words, the extra correctness came at the cost of tons more boilerplate and “fighting the type system”

Elixir is not weakly typed, it has strong typing on the contrary. The word you're looking for is "dynamic". Javascript and PHP are weakly typed, neither Erlang nor Elixir.

PHP is weakly typed but it has a strict type option nowadays, and class properties can also be typed.

Combined with function parameters typehinting (which easily beats typespecs) it's a great and productive developer experience I must say.

I don't find this comment useful in any way since you are so weakly-informed and strongly-belligerent.

Elixir and Erlang are strongly- BUT DYNAMICALLY- typed. Next time, please check yourself before you wreck yourself.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com