If you don't mind me asking why would one use Erlang over Elixir?
Elixir is way more productive to write/deal with (Phoenix vs. Erlang templating) maybe if you're a web dev, but at the end of the day you're dealing with the same exact same underlying architecture. If you're a prolog programmer, Erlang will feel nicer than if you're a ruby programmer.
I have many packages published as Mix packages, and some published as rebar packages.
Overall, ergonomics definitely feel nicer with Elixir, but I feel like by having it be portrayed as "so different" from Erlang, people don't pull open the Erlang/OTP docs, and don't look at the dozens of behaviors that already exist that usually solve your problem.
Like, why is there a gen stage in Elixir but not in Erlang?
If you wanna use the BEAM, you can use it. If they were more in sync, and provided OOTB in the same distribution, I'd always lean towards Elixir.
Just feels weird that Elixir gets a bunch of street cred for what are fundamentally Erlang/OTP capabilities
gen_stage is just a library. One could write it in Erlang. It's like asking why Broadway is only for Elixir and not Erlang.
It was hard to approach the Erlang docs when I started in Elixir. However, they've moved to an ex_doc format (is it ex_docs?) as a standard and it's so much easier to grok.
I couldn't imagine trying to implement this DSPy library in Erlang, for example
I know what you mean, at the same time I'm thinking we should welcome any momentum from the Elixir community. The more people working with Elixir/Erlang the better. And if you try Elixir at some point you learn about the Elixir background.
But otherwise they are mostly the same: Elixir is just an Erlang reskin.
So pretty much wherever you can use one, you can use the other.
I would have like it more, if they had reskinned it to look more like Haskell. But that's just my preference.