[ellroy]

I will second this. I've been using multiple libraries in our production Elixir app that haven't been updated in the last five years. Elixir itself was declared as "stable" feature-wise years ago. It may be argued that the type system being introduced is not in-keeping with that, but not sure. Jose is a very cautious and diligent "benevolent dictator" and you get a lot of backward compatibility guarantees. Erlang is the same. Compared to what some people might be used to with churn in Node/React etc it is apples and oranges.

[sodapopcan]

The semantics can certainly be argued, but a type system is sort of on its own tier of as far as language features go. Most importantly, there is only going to be one backward incompatible change which is the spec syntax, otherwise it is just leveraging how we already write Elixir.

[ellroy]

Yes, I'm not worried about it. I've not been following it as closely as I'd like, but from what I've read the core team seems to be taking a very measured incremental approach with the type system.

[sodapopcan]

Yep! It's leveraging pattern-matching and guards as well as looking at code itself for inference.

[lamuswawir]

Erlang is not very backward compatible. At least not at OTP 22.