4 ms·
I think PureScript[0] is a great contender: - It generates beautiful javascript code - It can separate PureScript modules into nodejs modules - It has an eve
by arianvanp 11y ago
I think PureScript[0] is a great contender:
- It generates beautiful javascript code
- It can separate PureScript modules into nodejs modules
- It has an even stronger type system than elm . For example, typeclasses
- has great interop with javascript
- Because it can compile to node.js modules, and can use node.js libraries, it's actually possible to write a Universal app (I tend to avoid isomorphic, as it means something totall different in pure functional programming languages like PureScript. (https://github.com/paf31/purescript-isomorphisms) https://github.com/paf31/purescript-isomorphisms)).
One issue I have had so far is that once your project gets big, the compile times are pretty annoying. But apart from that; a great language!
[0] -http://www.purescript.org/ http://www.purescript.org/
- Keats 11y agoHow big are we talking about for the compile times? Is there any in-depth recent comparison of elm and purescript somewhere? I found some links from almost a year ago but I assume it changed a lot since then.
- purescript 11y agoThe largest all-PureScript application I know of is SlamData[0], which takes about 12s for a rebuild, but SlamData uses a _lot_ of modules. For smaller projects it's much less. It's not great, but performance is one of three main goals for the current milestone. There is an alternative front-end called psc-compile[1] which reduces the incremental build times considerably. I hope to be able to integrate it soon. [0] slamdata.com [1] github.com/bitc/purescript/tree/psc-compile/psc-compile