I don't particularly care for the ambiguity that stems from facets of it being optional, nor the way function match arms are defined, nor the :atom or lowercase variable naming syntax. The mixing of do and -> kinda bugs me as well. :shrug:

Though my opinion on the matter is deeply colored and probably unreliable because I'm one of those weirdos that thinks that Erlang syntax is actually quite nice for the most part.

Also, I'm in no position to complain since currently my technical life (what little is left not making slide decks) now revolves around Rust, Agda, and TLA+ (god help me).

I’m also one of those weirdos. I’m a big fan of Erlang syntax: very concise, mostly trivial to read (although list comprehensions can get hairy).

Same here. I’ll take Erlang’s conciseness and readability over Elixir’s prolixity any day.

It's been a while since I looked at Elixir but the different syntax for invoking named functions vs lambdas really left a bad taste in my mouth...

Also I remember trying to do something with the pipe operator that I couldn't get working due to the syntax of the language but which would've been trivial in Clojure using one of the threading macros.

Pardon me for saying it but it sounds like you tried for 5 minutes, gave up because it's not familiar to you, and then said you don't like the pipe operator.

You might have wanted to say something else but this is how you sounded to me. Am I wrong?