3 ms·

Speed is one thing, but the fact that you must replicate your business model client AND server-side with Elm is a huge minus. I would take ScalaJS over any 4 of

Speed is one thing, but the fact that you must replicate your business model client AND server-side with Elm is a huge minus. I would take ScalaJS over any 4 of those frameworks any day.

jeremiep 10y ago
Why not just use Clojure? You've got datomic on the server and datascript on the client, transit on the wire, reader conditionals to share code and much more. Plus everything can be modified as its running. When it comes to web frameworks I don't really care about performance as much as I care about managing complexity. Which is why I'm looking at om.next over all the other frameworks. And managing complexity is not something you can benchmark in toy projects - every single framework is virtually the same at such a small scale.
- Roboprog 10y ago
  Or just use Javascript as-is, with perhaps Node.js or Nashorn on the back end. But I actually like Javascript.
  - Roboprog 10y ago
    And not so much care for the transpiler hoop jumping routine.
- asciihacker 10y ago
  > Why not just use Clojure? I guess as a professional Python developer, it would take some time to get used to all the parentheses. I've used Emacs for 20+ years, but outside of elisp I've never been comfortable with s-exprs. I had never heard of om.next. I think this is what you mean: https://github.com/omcljs/om https://github.com/omcljs/om ?? correct? > And managing complexity is not something you can benchmark in toy projects - every single framework is virtually the same at such a small scale. Well, looking at how much garbage was needed to implement todomvc in Backbone kept me from considering it any further :)
  - throwanem 10y ago
    > looking at how much garbage was needed to implement todomvc in Backbone kept me from considering it any further And in this you were wise! Or at the very least fortunate.
- premium-concern 10y ago
  Clojure doesn't even have types. I think the languages aren't really comparable from a maturity and support pov. Clojure is mainly done by hobbyists and enthusiasts. There is a large gap in terms of tooling that can't be closed in a few years.
- jmite 10y ago
  I like my types, without runtime overhead of type checks
appsappsapps 10y ago
Elm on the frontend and Haskell on the backend is a sensible choice, though at that point you may be better off with PureScript on the frontend.
- Mickydtron 10y ago
  I have a hobby project that uses Elm on the front end with Elixir and Phoenix on the back end, and that has been working really well. Elm's event machine like architecture goes well with Phoenix's native support for channels, although the elm library for Phoenix Channels is definitely not production ready. It has been a very bizarre experience having dynamic typing on the back end and static on the front end, though. Everything feels slightly topsy turvy.
jmite 10y ago
I think server side Elm will come eventually. It's just taking time.

Speed is one thing, but the fact that you must replicate your business model client AND server-side with Elm is a huge minus. I would take ScalaJS over any 4 of those frameworks any day.

jeremiep 10y ago

Why not just use Clojure? You've got datomic on the server and datascript on the client, transit on the wire, reader conditionals to share code and much more. Plus everything can be modified as its running. When it comes to web frameworks I don't really care about performance as much as I care about managing complexity. Which is why I'm looking at om.next over all the other frameworks. And managing complexity is not something you can benchmark in toy projects - every single framework is virtually the same at such a small scale.

Roboprog 10y ago
Or just use Javascript as-is, with perhaps Node.js or Nashorn on the back end. But I actually like Javascript.
- Roboprog 10y ago
  And not so much care for the transpiler hoop jumping routine.
asciihacker 10y ago
> Why not just use Clojure? I guess as a professional Python developer, it would take some time to get used to all the parentheses. I've used Emacs for 20+ years, but outside of elisp I've never been comfortable with s-exprs. I had never heard of om.next. I think this is what you mean: https://github.com/omcljs/om https://github.com/omcljs/om ?? correct? > And managing complexity is not something you can benchmark in toy projects - every single framework is virtually the same at such a small scale. Well, looking at how much garbage was needed to implement todomvc in Backbone kept me from considering it any further :)
- throwanem 10y ago
  > looking at how much garbage was needed to implement todomvc in Backbone kept me from considering it any further And in this you were wise! Or at the very least fortunate.
premium-concern 10y ago
Clojure doesn't even have types. I think the languages aren't really comparable from a maturity and support pov. Clojure is mainly done by hobbyists and enthusiasts. There is a large gap in terms of tooling that can't be closed in a few years.
jmite 10y ago
I like my types, without runtime overhead of type checks

appsappsapps 10y ago

Elm on the frontend and Haskell on the backend is a sensible choice, though at that point you may be better off with PureScript on the frontend.

Mickydtron 10y ago
I have a hobby project that uses Elm on the front end with Elixir and Phoenix on the back end, and that has been working really well. Elm's event machine like architecture goes well with Phoenix's native support for channels, although the elm library for Phoenix Channels is definitely not production ready. It has been a very bizarre experience having dynamic typing on the back end and static on the front end, though. Everything feels slightly topsy turvy.

jmite 10y ago

I think server side Elm will come eventually. It's just taking time.