3 ms·
From outside, with no knowledge of this "ELM Controversy", this is all very confusing. I love the ELM Architecture. Why is there a problem if it is implemente
by FrustratedMonky 3y ago
From outside, with no knowledge of this "ELM Controversy", this is all very confusing.
I love the ELM Architecture. Why is there a problem if it is implemented in another language?
I'd think any functional language could implement the ELM Architecture, and thus be 'native', or more integrated into that particular languages ecosystem, and this would offer benefits beyond trying to integrate ELM into each individual ecosystem.
And doing this re-implementation, would in no way be a comment on the ELM founder.
Also, Doesn't Linus say "NO", quite a bit with Linux? Why jump on the ELM guy for doing same thing.
- threatofrain 3y agoThe link is that Elmish is a competitor of Elm, and that the creator of Elm is a factor to the evolution of Elm. Leadership is a big deal in open source and is the sole differentiator behind the late iojs and OpenTofu. The matter of leadership is especially weighty for niche or emerging ecosystems like Clojure, Rust, or SolidJS.
- _svoh 3y agoWhen Linus says no, he rejects features and pull requests. That's fine. That's responsibly shepherding your implementation. That's not what Elm does. They lock down the compiler so only Elm devs can modify internals, which would be equivalent to Linus trying to prevent people from modifying the kernel. They really don't like people forking their repo, which would be equivalent to Linus getting mad at people making derivative kernels (because it would "split the community.") It's not just a matter of saying "no," it's trying to control what devs do to an UNREASONABLE degree.