▲ | innocentoldguy 2 days ago | |||||||
Gleam lacks lisp-style macros, and its implementations of BEAM and OTP are not exhaustive. For example, Gleam does not support: - Hot updates. - Full distributed system support. – Low-level process manipulation. - Named processes. - Advanced supervision strategies. - Behaviours other than GenServer. - Type-safe distributed messaging. - And several other things that I value in BEAM and OTP. I can't justify trading the full power of BEAM and OTP for static typing. To be fair, though, I've written a lot of code in both statically and dynamically typed languages, and static typing isn't something I value much (to the point that you might say I don't care about it at all :D). | ||||||||
▲ | raphinou 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||
I knew otp was still suboptimal in gleam, but thanks for mentioning all these additional points! Funny how preferences and priorities vary among devs, I need my static type system! :-) But note even in static type systems there are variations. I'm talking about an hindley milner type system with its type inference like the one in fsharp | ||||||||
▲ | felixyz 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||
My current preference is to use Elixir and its great ecosystem as the shell for my project, and implement the core business logic in Gleam. | ||||||||
|