JsonKody
This is highly subjective but in my mind Haskell and Ruby/Rust has one of the most beautiful lambda syntax
\a b → a + b
and
|a, b| a + b
so if Elixir syntax is mostly form Ruby why they ditched one of the most beautiful things on Ruby and goes with this abomination monster:
&(&1 + &2)
??
PS: Please note, my intent is not to criticize; I’m genuinely interested in understanding the design choices behind this syntax. 
edit/note: |a, b| a + b is just Rust syntax, I thought that it’s also Ruby, but while Ruby is similar it wraps it in labda { ... }
Where Next?
Trending in Questions
Other Trending Topics
Latest on Elixir Forum
Sponsor Spotlight
Deploy Phoenix to your own VPS with PaaS ease: push-to-deploy, zero downtime, auto SSL, managed Postgres. 14-day free trial at potions.io
Categories:
Sub Categories:
Forums
Popular Tags
- #ecto
- #liveview
- #troubleshooting
- #learning-elixir
- #library
- #deployment
- #erlang
- #testing
- #genserver
- #mix
- #absinthe
- #remote-other
- #otp
- #plug
- #how-to-question
- #macros
- #postgres
- #elixirconf
- #channels
- #exunit
- #discussion
- #code-sync
- #podcasts
- #javascript
- #onsite
- #dialyzer
- #docker
- #authentication
- #umbrella
- #full-time-contract
- #podcasts-by-brainlid
- #ecto-query
- #ai
- #elixirconf-us
- #blog-post
- #elixir-ls
- #phoenix_html
- #iex
- #graphql
- #genstage
- #websockets
- #supervisor
- #advent-of-code
- #distillery
- #processes
- #api
- #forms
- #hex
- #security
- #metaprogramming
Our Sponsors
Build Elixir applications with speed and confidence.
We build reliable cloud platforms for business-critical systems.
Catch errors, track performance, monitor hosts and more.
Error tracking, logs, uptime, and Just Enough APM. Built for developers.
Elixir, Erlang & BEAM conferences from Code Sync - join us in 2026!
Practical resources that improve the lives of professional developers.
Master modern tools, write cleaner code, and tackle real-world challenges.
Bringing learning, work and compliance together since 1987.
The team behind Membrane, Popcorn, LiveDebugger. Available for hire.
Courses that'll move you from confusion to "Aha, now I get it!"
Showing Posts 1 to 10- Show Best Posts
- Show All (oldest first)
- Show All (newest first)
gpopides
I dont know the answer to your question but just a small note, this is not the lambda syntax.
The lambda syntax would be
fn a, b -> a + b endWhat you mention is the capture operator which is similar to method reference in java/kotlin
JsonKody
Yep, I know this syntax, and it’s okay—neither bad nor awesome. I was just curious about the other one and whether there’s a particular reason Elixir didn’t adopt the Ruby syntax.
Oh, my bad.
sodapopcan
Ruby now has
collection.map { _1 }so clearly they were a little jealous of ElixirBut ya, highly subjective.
I actually prefer Elixir’s since you don’t have to invent a variable name, even if just one letter. It makes refactoring that much more smooth.
LostKobrakai
Would the ruby syntax support multiple function heads? I wouldn‘t expect there‘s a clear way on how that would be handled.
JsonKody
Oh, I didn’t know about this feature. Sorry for my ignorance.
Now it really make sense.
JsonKody
Thanks for the explanation. I’m just starting to learn Elixir, so I’m still a beginner. Given this information, I have to admit that the lambda syntax in Elixir does make a lot of sense for its use-cases.
hauleth
Ruby lambda syntax is
lambda { |a, b| a + b }which is far from pretty IMHO. You probably meant block syntax, but that is slightly different from lambdas, as you can have only one block, with that fancy pants syntax, per function call. So it is not fully apples to apples.smathy
Most people use the shorthand
-> a, b { a + b }syntax, which I think is quite pretty.JsonKody
True, sorry I have bad info - thought that Rust get it from Ruby but that
labda { ... }wrap is <not so good>JsonKody
That’s interesting… I’ve never seen that before. It’s definitely an improvement!