5 ms·
You can totally use JS libraries with Elm. Source: we do it all the time at NoRedInk, and we've been using Elm in production for our millions of users (as our g
by rtfeldman 11y ago
You can totally use JS libraries with Elm. Source: we do it all the time at NoRedInk, and we've been using Elm in production for our millions of users (as our go-to for all front-end work at the company, not just as a side thing) for the better part of a year now. :)
Details about our experience with Elm in production: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2FtMbb-nLs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2FtMbb-nLs
- tommyd 11y agoThat's interesting to know! Thanks
- pka 11y agoJust for the obligatory record: Purescript is basically "Elm evolved". Everything Elm does, Purescript does better (FFI for example is such a chore in Elm). Drawback: the learning curve is basically as steep as Haskell's.
- skeeterbug 11y agoMy experience with Purescript/pulp was rather negative. Basic commands were throwing errors (pulp init IIRC) so I decided to not even consider it for anything serious.
- pka 11y agoThe tooling is not perfect, that's absolutely true. I have to say though that any imperfections (which are going to get fixed anyway) are well worth it if you want a pure strongly typed language for the web. There's simply nothing better (except the full-blown Haskell-to-js compilers, like GHCJS and Haste of course). I recommend you try again and file a bug or look for help in irc if something breaks again (although I've never seen pulp init throw an error).
- skeeterbug 11y agoMy memory could be off (on which command failed). I think I still have the repo on my home machine, so I could re-visit and file a bug report. At the time I kept pursuing elm instead. Reports of better FFI with JS is why I had explored PureScript.
- skeeterbug 11y agoUpdate: The bug is with pulp server https://github.com/bodil/pulp/issues/133 https://github.com/bodil/pulp/issues/133
- pka 11y agoCool, does it work for you now?