That would be extremely limiting given that Elixir doesn't have objects and the prevalent relational mapper Ecto is unique to that ecosystem.
It's an ecosystem created by former members of the Ruby community who fostered similar values so Ruby developers tend to "feel at home" even though the technology stack is very different.
That would be extremely limiting given that Elixir doesn't have objects and the prevalent relational mapper Ecto is unique to that ecosystem.
It's an ecosystem created by former members of the Ruby community who fostered similar values so Ruby developers tend to "feel at home" even though the technology stack is very different.
Beyond Functional Programming with Elixir and Erlang
Makes sense.
I would expand my question to relational mapper, if that avoids getting locked into oop.
I have been slowly comparing active-record, sqlalchemy, diesel, and prisma lately. I may end up including ecto in that comparison.
Some ruby devs have gone to golang. I am curious if former ruby devs would embrace a typed layer above elixir like caramel, if that ever takes off.
"the reason for not having static typing in Erlang was the absolute need for doing dynamic code upgrades of running systems."
source
"Typing Erlang is a hard problem!"
source
Does José Valim prefer dynamic typing or static typing?
Adolfo Neto ・ Dec 2 '21 ・ 2 min read
And Erlang has helpful error handling primitives for concurrent processing that Golang figures it doesn't need.