[enraged_camel]

> It's a near certainty that I've written an order of magnitude more elixir code than you have and I can say without a shadow of a doubt that elixir's lack of static typing definitely makes it less useful.

You should really read that post I linked, and do a bit more research on this topic. The consensus in the Elixir community (where many members have written an order of magnitude more Elixir than you) is that static typing would be "nice to have", but is not critical by any means. Your post seems to be an attempt to spread FUD.

[59nadir]

I've done all the research I need to, thank you very much, and I was there when this thread was started and much earlier than that. The consensus in the elixir community is hardly relevant when most of the users aren't experienced enough with type systems to know what they're talking about.

If you asked a community of people who primarily have never used languages that don't have garbage collection, they'll likely not understand at all why it could be a bad thing.

Someone who has used a language without garbage collection and is comfortable with basic allocation strategies is very likely to remark that having control of memory allocation and deallocation is very often something that you end up wanting instead of having to re-architect your solution in indirect ways to influence the garbage collector. This comes from having a wider perspective and the elixir community at large does not have this.

Given that the elixir community is also very cultlike it's hardly a productive thing to take what they say as the objective truth.

(I'm not saying this is an outsider at all, I've been a part of the elixir community since 2016. It's not really despite that I am saying these things, it's because of that.)

[enraged_camel]

Friend, you're making a lot of assumptions and claims about people you don't know (including me), and have a certain streak of arrogance that is difficult to get past. This makes it impossible to have a productive conversation, if having a productive conversation is your goal.

I advise some humility, as well as some effort to recognize that your opinions sound very dogmatic. You are of course free to like or dislike any language you want, but it is important to understand that going from one's own preferences to grandiose claims about a language's merits and usefulness is a rather big leap.

[59nadir]

> Friend, you're making a lot of assumptions and claims about people you don't know (including me), and have a certain streak of arrogance that is difficult to get past.

This is rich, coming from someone who claimed that anyone who wants a type system in elixir hasn't actually used elixir.

> You are of course free to like or dislike any language you want, ...

This is the most common reaction within the elixir community, to assume that anyone who doesn't put the language on a pedestal dislikes it or hates it. You might want to consider what that actually says about the community and the atmosphere of near unconditional admiration it displays. It's an extremely distasteful attribute for a community to have.

Elixir is useful for shuffling data from point A to point B... That usefulness has its limits, that's it.

[enraged_camel]

> This is rich, coming from someone who claimed that anyone who wants a type system in elixir hasn't actually used elixir.

You may want to read my original post more carefully. I said most people who complain about the lack of static typing haven't actually used it. Obviously there are some, like you, who have experience with the language and dislike the lack of static typing. And that is fine.

I mean, you only need to casually browse HN threads about new languages to find posts along the lines of "this looks interesting, but the lack of static typing means I probably won't use it." Instead of taking a holistic view of the language and its merits and researching its design choices and trade-offs, they adopt a dogmatic mindset and dismiss it outright.

>>This is the most common reaction within the elixir community, to assume that anyone who doesn't put the language on a pedestal dislikes it or hates it.

No, that's just me, and it was a figure of speech. Elixir community is very mature and welcoming, and most people in it come from other languages, and are able to objectively discuss the language, its merits and shortcomings. The post I linked in my OP is a great example.

>>Elixir is useful for shuffling data from point A to point B... That usefulness has its limits, that's it.

I mean, again, that's just your opinion, and it's a simplistic one. I obviously don't know the depth and breadth of your experience (and won't make assumptions about it, like you did about mine), but Elixir is useful for, and excels at, more things than simply "shuffling data". That is why there is so much excitement for it: the use cases it enables, and the elegance and simplicity with which it enables them, are nearly unparalleled. The lack of static typing does not change this fact, even if it can make certain things a bit more cumbersome towards the extreme end of the project size and complexity spectrum.

[pdimitar]

> This is the most common reaction within the elixir community, to assume that anyone who doesn't put the language on a pedestal dislikes it or hates it.

Not sure you and I read the same forum. My reaction to Elixir criticism usually is -- "well, if you dislike it for this or that reason, or simply don't find it useful, then don't use it, there are a lot of other languages out there". Many others do the same.

I haven't noticed cargo-culting on ElixirForum in a long time. You might simply be too cynical to differentiate people whose work life has been genuinely improved (and they express that sentiment on the forum) and people who overhype something you dislike (for valid reasons for your use-cases).