[iamwil]

While I don't particularly like Erlang syntax either, what I find with learning new languages is: the syntax bothers you the most at first because 1) you don't know anything about the language. 2) It's the most obvious and easy thing to pick on first.

After you get into it, I've found that syntax is usually the least of my grievances in a new language. It usually has to do with features missing from other languages.

Lately, I've been doing javascript a lot more, and at first, I didn't like typing "function() {" all the time (and still don't). But now, I find that javascript doesn't have method_missing (only FF implements non-standard __noSuchMethod__), nor can you override the subscript operator. Gah! So then a thing like typing "function() {" fades into the background.

[silentbicycle]

Indeed. Ugly syntax is such an obvious thing to complain about, but ugly semantics and ugly design are a bigger problem in the long run. (I really like Erlang's programming model, but find the syntax a bit scruffy.)

Erlang's syntax seems a lot less weird if you're familiar with Prolog, FWIW. It was a originally a DSL built on top of SICSTus Prolog, but seems to have accumulated some extra syntax along the way. Same with a lot of its other quirks.

[davidw]

Yes, Erlang's syntax is something you can still complain about a little bit even after having gotten comfortable with it. It's just not one of the language's strong points in my opinion. Of course, for a competent programmer, it's nothing more than a minor annoyance and is no reason not to use Erlang for projects where it would be a good fit.