Sorry to pick on Moar it’s just the one I’ve been most exposed to. I do appreciate the README advice but I realize I’m thinking more of a team setting where the whole thing is being used and it’s hard to argue against using certain pieces of it when it’s already there, and there are a few things in Moar I’m very against (but that’s not your fault, we’re all entitled to write code how we want!) Generally, though, I’ve found myself happily ditching small helpers that just wrap an English term around very simple code and it makes reading code far more enjoyable for me. slot_given? is an example of something I’ve run into which is just a wrapper around foo != []. Another example is present? (available in Moar but a common one people make these regardless)—that one is more problematic as it conveys “I don’t care what type this is” when that is never true.
sodapopcan
adamu
Thanks for the responses all, it’s useful to see what people find useful, there were a few in there that were new to me, and I’m sure this thread will be helpful for others starting new projects too 
This one made me 
- I usually try to remove Timex from legacy projects unless there is some specific functionality it’s providing that can’t easily be replaced by built-in functionality.
mudasobwa
I tend to include blindly dev/test deps only
{:mox, "~> 1.0", only: [:dev, :test]},
{:stream_data, "~> 1.0", only: [:dev, :test]},
{:doctest_formatter, "~> 0.2", only: [:dev], runtime: false},
{:enfiladex, "~> 0.3", only: [:dev, :test]},
{:excoveralls, "~> 0.14", only: [:test], runtime: false},
{:credo, "~> 1.0", only: [:dev, :test]},
{:dialyxir, "~> 1.0", only: [:dev, :test], runtime: false},
{:ex_doc, ">= 0.0.0", only: [:dev]}
Usually I also use some of my libs, such as estructura, finitomata, rambla, telemetria and antenna.
hangyas
Good point, I just realized I probably haven’t started a new project since v1.17 added Duration and shift and didn’t bother to refactor. Looking into one of my projects, it’s 50% Timex.shift that could be removed but the other 50% is Timex.format that I think is still worth the extra dependency. But granted, it doesn’t apply to all fresh projects.
dimitarvp
After a few minutes of reading I have zero idea what a “common test” is. No links, no explanations, and I’m not going to the Erlang docs to search.
Bad DX. If the author can’t advertise the value of their library in a minute, it’s not going to get used too much.
Though I’ll admit “multi-node test” does sound a touch intriguing.
mudasobwa
The UX is very carefully designed. If you don’t know what common_test is, you don’t want to mess with this library. common_test is so huge of a concept, that explaining it in enfiladex docs would be alongside with explaining what Postgres is in docs for Postgrex ecto adapter.
woylie
A link to the common test docs (I assume this is it) would probably be helpful for the unenlightened.
mudasobwa
Thank you! The thing is, I am still 102% sure enfiladex is not designed for those who are unfamiliar with common_test, because it only provides some helpers to convert ex_unit into common tests, but it’d appear extremely unfriendly to anyone not having an experience with common test itself (imho.)
I pay a lot of attention to the documentation in all my libs save for that one, and I believe that’s right.
billylanchantin
Something not mentioned yet:
It lets me be declarative about option validation and keeps the docs in sync with the options.