3 ms·
>while also being understandable by humans. I don't understand how one can understand Elm and not understand Haskell, unless the expectation that Haskell is di
by wyager 10y ago
>while also being understandable by humans.
I don't understand how one can understand Elm and not understand Haskell, unless the expectation that Haskell is difficult makes people's brains shut down without even trying.
Most of the ML-esque concepts that make Haskell "hard" to read if you come from a C/Python/Java/etc. background (ADTs and pattern matching, application by adjacency, etc.) are present in Elm as well.
> I vastly prefer Elm's record syntax to Haskell's,
Are you familiar with Lenses? Classy lenses in Haskell provide a slightly less sexy but more powerful system of structural typing.
- galfarragem 10y agoElm looks like a simplified and specially a rebranded Haskell, a "functional language for humans". This could work wonders as marketing strategy but there is still a remaining pain point blocking Elm aspiration to become mainstream: community management. There is plenty of room to improve there.