3 ms·
ctrl-f Elm yields no results. It seems Elm is not even part of the discussion anymore. I get it, it didn't get a release in 4 years, but the path it showed was
by luckystarr 3y ago
ctrl-f Elm yields no results. It seems Elm is not even part of the discussion anymore.
I get it, it didn't get a release in 4 years, but the path it showed was pleasant and robust. Why did nobody pursue it further, or did someone, and I just don't know about it?
- dcre 3y agoI used Elm for a while (even gave a conference talk about it in 2015) but I don’t really know what Elm would add to the discussion. Elm’s template syntax is only superficially different from JSX. It’s nested function calls, which is exactly what the JSX transform turns JSX into. And Elm overall is really not very different from React. What happened is that TypeScript got really good and took over. You don’t need a different language to get great static typing.
- weatherlight 3y agoI don't think thats the reason Elm went away. Typescript's type system isn't sound and it's overly complicated. Elm's type system is by far more robust, sound, and much much easier to learn and reason about. Elm went away because: 1.) It doesn't have a "Microsoft" behind it to champion it. 2.) It's a functional languages with "weird syntax" (I happen to think the ML style langs are beautiful, but to each their own) 3.) Probably most important, the maintainers and the community around Elm imploded.
- dcre 3y agoIMO TypeScript’s unsoundness is a red herring. It’s a wise pragmatic design choice, and the alternatives have tradeoffs that were judged to be worse. Whether people run into the particular problems caused by TypeScript’s particular sources of unsoundness is an empirical question. I can’t remember a time it caused me an issue.
- weatherlight 3y agoany, any, any, any, etc.