Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by dllthomas 3660 days ago
Compilation targets for typed languages are very frequently untyped (think ASM, for the most canonical example) - it is neither weird nor difficult.
1 comments

Could you clarify? I don't immediately see the relevance of this. Why does it matter if the compilation target is or is not also strongly typed, and how does that imply anything about the experience of using a high-level dynamically typed language vs. a high-level statically typed language?
I understood the (some number of grands-)parent comment to be saying "Elixir seems a good candidate [for a compilation target]." If that was not your interpretation, then it is certainly non-sequiter. Re-reading, I think I misread something in a surrounding comment, though I'm not sure what.
I said "Elixir seems a good candidate" for backend development, not as a compilation target. The OP asked for suggestions regarding light, friendly FP languages for backend dev.
Yeah - like I said, I think I misread something up-thread, so I had the wrong context in mind.