4 ms·
I got into studying FRP around 3 years ago for my senior project. Aside from a decent, clear explanation, there were hardly any actual implementations of this a
by stepvhen 10y ago
I got into studying FRP around 3 years ago for my senior project. Aside from a decent, clear explanation, there were hardly any actual implementations of this allegedly good paradigm (something Evan covered in his thesis, and the basis for Elm). It seemed like a paradigm that was full of promise and potential but failed to deliver in any worthwhile way.
(Such was the case for my senior project, studying the viability of Arrowized FRP in Elm. In short, I concluded that it was nothing but hell and nobody should bother.)
I am happy to seem Elm drop FRP, even if I wished it could be the savior of the method. At this point I think it's a troubled concept and should be limited to old theses.
- Apanatshka 10y agoI'm similarly ambivalent. Though Elm and it's flavour of FRP were more of a hobby (I never turned into an academically valuable thing :) ), I was still very interested in the roots of the system and how to use and improve it. I know the change was happening already, that signals were not used much in the Elm Architecture; I also understand and applaud the simplification. But I'm still a little sad to see FRP go, it's an interesting idea and does have potential IMHO.