3 ms·
Yikes, 1,670KB for generated javascript alone, that's kind of a deal breaker. GHCJS has a ways to go methinks. Js_of_ocaml and Scala.js are far better suited f
by virtualwhys 11y ago
Yikes, 1,670KB for generated javascript alone, that's kind of a deal breaker.
GHCJS has a ways to go methinks. Js_of_ocaml and Scala.js are far better suited for production use today as the type safety "tax" is much smaller (i.e. binary is at most 1/4 the size for equivalent functionality).
EDIT:
didn't realize you cannot yet call into Haskell from GHCJS, and even Haskell to GHCJS requires going through FFI[1]
Meh, might as well use Fay or Haste if that's the caste.
[1] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/29967135/how-to-call-haskell-from-javascript-with-ghcjs http://stackoverflow.com/questions/29967135/how-to-call-hask...
- TazeTSchnitzel 11y agoI quite like Haste for Haskell to JS compilation. Its output isn't too bloated.
- codygman 11y agoPurescript (while not quite Haskell) also has very small output and is strict by default. There's also the very fun, informative, and productive "Purescript By Example"[0] book. 0: https://leanpub.com/purescript/read https://leanpub.com/purescript/read