3 ms·
> All I said was that elm was the least leaky abstraction I've ever encountered. Your frustration with IO proves my point. Doesn't that prove my point, that th
by kbd 8y ago
> All I said was that elm was the least leaky abstraction I've ever encountered. Your frustration with IO proves my point.
Doesn't that prove my point, that there's an impedance mismatch of Elm trying to present a purely-functional world on top of a very side-effect-full environment of the browser+DOM etc.?
> but the practicality won't be apparent until you create a huge 10 million LOC monolithic SPA with elm
It sounds like you're arguing that for apps smaller than "absurdly large", plain JavaScript can be better.
Calling bs on anyone having anything approaching 10 million LOC in Elm. You're just making things up.
Edit: for reference, the Linux kernel has about 20 million LOC (according to Wikipedia), so you're talking about half a Linux kernel written in Elm. Absurd.
- crimsonalucard 8y ago>Doesn't that prove my point, that there's an impedance mismatch of Elm trying to present a purely-functional world on top of a very side-effect-full environment of the browser+DOM etc.? Your reply doesn't even address my point. That's all I'm saying. All I said is that I disagree with you. >It sounds like you're arguing that for apps smaller than "absurdly large", plain JavaScript can be better. >Calling bs on anyone having anything approaching 10 million LOC in Elm. You're just making things up. >Edit: for reference, the Linux kernel has about 20 million LOC (according to Wikipedia), so you're talking about half a Linux kernel written in Elm. Absurd. Don't ever call what I say absurd or BS that's plain offensive and against the principles here on HN. If you want me to continue replying to you, I'll need an apology otherwise I will ignore you.