5 ms·

It sounds like you might like PureScript [1] or GHCJS [2] more than Elm. Have you tried either of those? [1]: http://www.purescript.org/ http://www.purescript.

It sounds like you might like PureScript [1] or GHCJS [2] more than Elm. Have you tried either of those? [1]: http://www.purescript.org/ http://www.purescript.org/ [2]: https://github.com/ghcjs/ghcjs https://github.com/ghcjs/ghcjs

leshow 10y ago
No, those don't really appeal to me. I think Elm had a great middle ground for a while pre-0.16 with Signals. I'm just disappointed at what I see as a lack of positive change for the language. The more stuff that becomes compiler magic the worse the language is going to get IMO.
- Skinney 10y ago
  > The more stuff that becomes compiler magic the worse the language is going to get IMO. Not sure what you mean here. Elm 0.18 has less compiler magic, not more.
  - HappyAndHarmles 10y ago
    One such magic is the "comparable" thing. See http://reasonablypolymorphic.com/blog/elm-is-wrong http://reasonablypolymorphic.com/blog/elm-is-wrong and https://github.com/elm-lang/elm-compiler/issues/774 https://github.com/elm-lang/elm-compiler/issues/774
    - Skinney 10y ago
      Yes, but that's not new in 0.18
  - leshow 10y ago
    Did you read my comment? I mentioned the removal of Signals and it's replacement with the 'magic' Html.app
    - Skinney 10y ago
      Html.App used to be a namespace, I suspect you mean Program? In any case, how is that any more, or less, magic than Signals? Considering that the compiler has removed syntax in later versions, later versions of Elm has less magic than earlier versions.