Re: [Erlang Forums] [Erlang/OTP Proposals/Proposals: RFC] Re-visiting EEP-0055

--0000000000002e56c305dd7d48df
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

There were multiple arguments from a bunch of people.
The principle of the main one is "Render unto Caesar the things that are
Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's".
 If you like Elixir no one objects on this. Just leave Erlang alone.

But you just could not or don't want to listen.
Perhaps because you are a fanboy not an engineer if you can't see such
simple arguments.
And It's pointless to argue to argue with fanboys.

=D0=BF=D0=BD, 25 =D0=B0=D0=BF=D1=80. 2022 =D0=B3. =D0=B2 18:14, Austin Zieg=
ler <[email protected]>:

> On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 10:58 AM Stanislav Ledenev <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> One question - why? Just because we can?
>> Erlang is doomed, Sorry Joe, we f**d things up.
>>
>
> I really can=E2=80=99t help but laugh at over the top reactions like this=
 and
> those who can=E2=80=99t help but bash Elixir because they don=E2=80=99t l=
ike the syntax.
>
> What if this syntax (or some other syntax) helps the compiler generate
> better (safer, faster, *whatever*) code? How would anyone know unless it
> gets tried? Why would anyone want to try it when they know that a certain
> vocal subset of the community are going to be pitching embarrassing fits
> over it?
>
> If this is introduced in OTP 26, then stop upgrading. Seriously. Stay on
> OTP 25 or before. But seriously, stop acting like children about this and
> saying that things are fucked up (because they=E2=80=99re not; you just d=
on=E2=80=99t like
> this because you don=E2=80=99t like it). The only *real* objection that I=
=E2=80=99ve seen
> that makes sense to me is from Lo=C3=AFc, which is that it might be bette=
r to
> enable *annotations*, even if the only annotation initially available is
> for pinning. (My personal feeling on the annotation concept is that `^pin
> Variable` doesn=E2=80=99t feel right to me, but maybe `^pin:Variable` or
> `^pin{Variable}` or `^{pin}Variable` or something else, although more
> sigil-y, would be clearer.
>
> I mostly use Elixir, but often read Erlang codebases. On the Elixir core
> mailing list, there are frequent redirects to approach something as a
> possible PR to Erlang/OTP because it=E2=80=99s something that should bene=
fit all
> BEAM languages.
>
> Telemetry started as an Elixir library, but was quickly changed to a pure
> Erlang approach because it makes more sense to be something that all BEAM
> languages can use.
>
> Elixir has =E2=80=94 and I suspect both LFE and Gleam both have =E2=80=94=
 *enhanced *the
> BEAM through wider exposure, code contributions, and other contributions.
> If you can=E2=80=99t argue a feature request like in this EEP on its meri=
ts (or
> lack thereof) without trying to bash Elixir, then maybe you don=E2=80=99t=
 actually
> have an argument, but an emotional outburst, and should just *discard* yo=
ur
> rant after writing it.
>
> -a
> --
> Austin Ziegler =E2=80=A2 [email protected] =E2=80=A2 austin@halostatue=
.ca
> http://www.halostatue.ca/ =E2=80=A2 http://twitter.com/halostatue
>

--0000000000002e56c305dd7d48df
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">There were multiple arguments from a bunch of people. <br>=
The principle of the main one is &quot;Render unto Caesar the things that a=
re Caesar&#39;s, and unto God the things that are God&#39;s&quot;.<div>=C2=
=A0If you like Elixir no one objects on this. Just leave Erlang alone.<br><=
br>But you just could not or don&#39;t want to listen.=C2=A0</div><div>Perh=
aps because you are a fanboy not an engineer if you can&#39;t see such simp=
le arguments.=C2=A0</div><div>And It&#39;s pointless to argue=C2=A0to argue=
 with fanboys.<br></div></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"lt=
r" class=3D"gmail_attr">=D0=BF=D0=BD, 25 =D0=B0=D0=BF=D1=80. 2022 =D0=B3. =
=D0=B2 18:14, Austin Ziegler &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]">ha=
[email protected]</a>&gt;:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" styl=
e=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);paddin=
g-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr">On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 10:58=
 AM Stanislav Ledenev &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]" target=3D"=
_blank">[email protected]</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><div class=3D"gmail_quo=
te"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;bor=
der-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div=
>One question - why? Just because we can?</div><div>Erlang is doomed, Sorry=
 Joe, we f**d things up.</div></div></blockquote><div>=C2=A0</div></div>I r=
eally can=E2=80=99t help but laugh at over the top reactions like this and =
those who can=E2=80=99t help but bash Elixir because=C2=A0they don=E2=80=99=
t like the syntax.<div><br></div><div>What if this syntax (or some other sy=
ntax) helps the compiler generate better (safer, faster, <i>whatever</i>) c=
ode? How would anyone know unless it gets tried? Why would anyone want to t=
ry it when they know that a certain vocal subset of the community are going=
 to be pitching embarrassing fits over it?</div><div><br></div><div>If this=
 is introduced in OTP 26, then stop upgrading. Seriously. Stay on OTP 25 or=
 before. But seriously, stop acting like children about this and saying tha=
t things are fucked up (because they=E2=80=99re not; you just don=E2=80=99t=
 like this because you don=E2=80=99t like it). The only <i>real</i>=C2=A0ob=
jection that I=E2=80=99ve seen that makes sense to me is from Lo=C3=AFc, wh=
ich is that it might be better to enable <i>annotations</i>, even if the on=
ly annotation initially available is for pinning. (My personal feeling on t=
he annotation concept is that `^pin Variable` doesn=E2=80=99t feel right to=
 me, but maybe `^pin:Variable` or `^pin{Variable}` or `^{pin}Variable` or s=
omething else, although more sigil-y, would be clearer.</div><div><br></div=
><div>I mostly use Elixir, but often read Erlang codebases. On the Elixir c=
ore mailing list, there are frequent redirects to approach something as a p=
ossible PR to Erlang/OTP because it=E2=80=99s something that should benefit=
 all BEAM languages.</div><div><br></div><div>Telemetry started as an Elixi=
r library, but was quickly changed to a pure Erlang approach because it mak=
es more sense to be something that all BEAM languages can use.</div><div><b=
r></div><div>Elixir has =E2=80=94 and I suspect both LFE and Gleam both hav=
e =E2=80=94 <i>enhanced </i>the BEAM through wider exposure, code contribut=
ions, and other contributions. If you can=E2=80=99t argue a feature request=
 like in this EEP on its merits (or lack thereof) without trying to bash El=
ixir, then maybe you don=E2=80=99t actually have an argument, but an emotio=
nal outburst, and should just <i>discard</i>=C2=A0your rant after writing i=
t.<br><div><div><div><br></div><div>-a<br>-- <br><div dir=3D"ltr">Austin Zi=
egler =E2=80=A2 <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]" target=3D"_blank">h=
[email protected]</a> =E2=80=A2 <a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]" t=
arget=3D"_blank">[email protected]</a><br><a href=3D"http://www.halostat=
ue.ca/" target=3D"_blank">http://www.halostatue.ca/</a> =E2=80=A2 <a href=
=3D"http://twitter.com/halostatue" target=3D"_blank">http://twitter.com/hal=
ostatue</a></div></div></div></div></div></div>
</blockquote></div>

--0000000000002e56c305dd7d48df--