How robust is this for detecting usage via things like apply/3?
So far, there is no rule to check function usage and therefore we didn’t need to consider that case.
We didn’t add rules like that because that’s already covered by xref.
Oh, very cool. I didn’t know xref could be used like that.
How hard would it be to implement something equivalent for Elixir? Or is there already something like this for Elixir?
Nothing like this exists for Elixir, AFAIK.
We’ll need some different rules, tho.
Organizing spawnfest !!!
Besides a couple that are already mentioned (like Alan Kay and Rands)…
I was fortunate enough to be Hernán’s boss for a couple years and we’ve remained friends.
Hey, I recently (not a week ago) give a talk about my experience on this (I moved from developer to manager and back again twice in my career already): https://slides.com/elbrujohalcon/fdtmaba10p
Notes are in Spanish, sorry.
A much much earlier version of this talk was recorded here, too: https://eventil.com/talks/o8SpVx-brujo-benavides-from-developer-to-manager-and-back-again
I actually wrote a blog post about it.
I don’t think I star hundreds of repos, but I starred plenty of them I don’t contribute to, just because I use Sibell to be notified of their releases ;)
From my personal experience organizing EFLBA this year and watching Monika organize many Erlang factories over the years:
Thanks for running this u/elbrujohalcon. It was a super fun two days!
Thank you for participating :)
Thanks again for throwing it. :)
Besides HackWeek at the company where I work (where I will be refactoring a couple of libraries that became too entangled over time), I’ll be getting everything ready for SpawnFest.
This is me.
I read this, waiting for some kind of story payoff, and it never hit. Basically, instead of fixing an error it was embraced and became a joke. As far as I can tell, it was never fixed. I didn’t get any insight into even trying to find the error, nor did I get much about the culture, that is, how it became a joke.
In short: huh?
Yeah, the error was never fixed, mostly because it was not a single error. It was a group of errors: -0// was the symptom of something going terribly wrong and totally untrapped somewhere.
I’m not really interested in discussing how we debugged the many different situations in which -0// appeared and of course I don’t even remember most of them.
Nevertheless, I’m super happy to expand on how it became a joke as much as needed. I’m just not sure what to say. So, what would you recommend I add to make the culture part more complete and interesting? Any particular questions you think I can answer to give a better view of the cultural implications of -0// would be much appreciated.
I think if I were to relive my Erlang education, it would be to go against the severely pushed agenda of `no matter what, use behaviors from the get-go.’ gen_server is a great pattern, but it feels counter to everything functional programming and for that matter concurrent programming is all about. Sure, now knowing how the behaviors are implemented, it all fits, but for the first while, the behaviors felt magical (like OOP), stateful-feeling-ish (like OOP), and imperative (after all, 1. a gen_server is embodied within a single named process, despite that Erlang touts: go ahead, create millions of processes; 2. the most common thing to do with said servers is use =call= which is blocking/synchronous). In the end, of course, use the behaviors, but just blindly using them from day-one is a crappy lead-in to Erlang/OTP, and probably comes with many hidden costs as far as how fast & deep one learns the paradigms of FP and all things OTP.
I can’t agree more with this feeling. It is, in part, the inspiration behind this blog post. The idea is to first find the problems, try to solve them, figure out they’re always the same ones and somebody before you found them too, and only then using the tools that solve most of the problem for you and write your specific code.
It’s sad that these attitudes are the exception rather than the rule in software development.
(Btw, I had to laugh at the image for “if (Developers.Happy()…” where earlier the “no ifs” idea was mentioned. :D
HAHAHA! Good catch!
I’m starting with the refactoring of a huge chunk of the code in one of the main projects at my company.
It’s my 3rd week at the job ;)
IMO interviews are all about social signalling. This is why blind interviews are useful: they prevent us from confusing social signals that are similar to our own for high technical aptitude. NoRedInk is one of the only companies I know of that do these kinds of blind interviews, but surely there are others.
Interesting. Any recommended links where I can learn about blind interviews?
I’m receiving visits from a client and my boss (both super unusual things, considering we work at Buenos Aires and they live in the US). More importantly tho, I’m organizing a conference this Thursday/Friday.
Giving a talk at Erlang & Elixir Factory San Francisco! :)