[eggy]

Elixir is great, and I would loosely say it not homoiconic as Robert Virding, one of the original Erlang team and creator of LFE (Lisp Flavored Erlang), posits in an exchange with Jose Valim, creator of Elixir here[1]. In terms of qualifying a JSON-equivalent data structure as richer, compared to lists in Scheme or Lisp, I would disagree. I think you lose the code-as-data (down to the languages fundamentals) win in Scheme. Devin Torres makes the statement that Elixir is 'strongly homoiconic' [2], but his reference's definition does not fit Elixir [3]. You cannot add new constructs or operators in Elixir. I would say 'weakly homoiconic' if you are going to prefix an adverb on a page that invents terms, which I still think is like 'a little bit pregnant' - not logically consistent. I do not code for a living, so I can choose things on an interest basis, not a popularity or job market index. I am learning both Elixir and LFE, and Erlang by default, but I am gravitating towards LFE. I think LFE on the BEAM and Clojure on the JVM, makes for a good argument for me to stay in the Lisp world, and not the Ruby, ROR, or Elixir one.

[1] https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/lisp-flavoured-erlan...

[2] http://devintorr.es/blog/2013/06/11/elixir-its-not-about-syn...

[3] http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?HomoiconicLanguages

[gamache]

Thanks for the reply! I read the "[1]" link you posted, and the word "homoiconic" doesn't appear anywhere. Elixir code and data share the same native data structures, ergo Elixir is homoiconic. Virding's point is that Elixir lacks reader macros. For real-world usage, I consider that more of a strength than a weakness. :)