GenericJam
Is Elixir the Hundred Year Language?
In Paul Graham’s 2003 essay/talk, The Hundred Year Language, he makes various points about what we’ll likely need out of a language, want to use in a language and what types of resources will be available to programmers in a hundred years.
He’s a big Lisp fan. I think Elixir took some of the best parts of Lisp such as macros and FP in general.
Of all of the various things Graham muses about, I think Elixir is one of the better candidates for the hundred year language. If not Elixir itself, I would think Elixir is at least in the lineage. Thoughts?
Most Liked
praveenperera
Cochonours
Paul Graham doesn’t seem to agree as he wrote
For example, types seem to be an inexhaustible source of research papers, despite the fact that static typing seems to preclude true macros-- without which, in my opinion, no language is worth using.
He continues with
The trend is not merely toward languages being developed as open-source projects rather than “research”, but toward languages being designed by the application programmers who need to use them, rather than by compiler writers. This seems a good trend and I expect it to continue.
Which fits Elixir well, among others. And indeed this approach often bear fruits!
dimitarvp
Last Post!
dimitarvp
Yep. That pie-in-the-sky dream of “they all can leave and the project will keep getting new features and bugfixes starting next week with the new team” almost never happens. But it’s one of the brain bugs of us the people (especially businessmen) – it’s an illusion that is so pleasant that we scream at whoever tries to ruin it. It’s still an illusion 99% of the time though.
Code is much more often read than written, so a language being concise helps hugely with that.
Well, Clojure is a very practical modern LISP. But the lack of the BEAM’s runtime guarantees ruins most languages for me.
Absolutely. Additionally, and for all the hate that fringier tech (like Elixir) has to endure on HN/Reddit, Elixir is still quite damn fast in many scenarios. I’ve lately crafted a Rust tool that is 45% faster than the Elixir tool I wrote before it when calculating a histogram on files as big as 1GB (although I am sure the Rust code can be made faster; however, most people do a task and move on so I’m rather sure many won’t spend more than a day on it so it’s still a fair comparison).
That very much depends on what is being done though. “Let it crash” is completely useless if you have a bug in your code that makes a process crash and get infinitely restarted. And if it only gets restarted N times then you now have a system that gave up on trying to run something. I agree that this philosophy can be applied quite well for many scenarios – DB pools and DB exceptions being a prominent example – but it’s also one of the things that people kind of believe will solve a lot of problems via magic. Which it cannot do.
Popular in Discussions
Other popular topics
Chat & Discussions>Discussions
Categories:
Sub Categories:
Forums
Popular Tags
- #ecto
- #liveview
- #troubleshooting
- #learning-elixir
- #deployment
- #library
- #erlang
- #testing
- #genserver
- #mix
- #absinthe
- #remote-other
- #otp
- #plug
- #how-to-question
- #macros
- #postgres
- #channels
- #elixirconf
- #exunit
- #discussion
- #code-sync
- #javascript
- #podcasts
- #onsite
- #dialyzer
- #docker
- #authentication
- #umbrella
- #full-time-contract
- #podcasts-by-brainlid
- #ecto-query
- #elixir-ls
- #phoenix_html
- #iex
- #blog-post
- #graphql
- #genstage
- #ai
- #websockets
- #supervisor
- #elixirconf-us
- #advent-of-code
- #distillery
- #processes
- #forms
- #api
- #metaprogramming
- #hex
- #security










