Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Elm Compiler Written in Elm

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 84 posts

Re: Elm Compiler Written in Elm

#21

Post by onethought »

girishso wrote: post #15
yladiz wrote: post #7

Serious question: how popular is Elm? I've recently seen some tutorials showing up and anecdotally know some friends that have played around with it, but I haven't seen any job postings for it and so I'm wondering if it's just hyped up or if there is real demand for Elm developers professionally.

I’ve been writing Elm professionally for the past 2.5 years on a large project. The language is a pure joy to use, unparalleled refactoring experience. Yes it’s a small community, but there’s many jobs posted on Elm slack.

It’s quite parallel to typescript (strict) refactoring, isn’t it?

Re: Elm Compiler Written in Elm

#22

Post by egeozcan »

pd-andy wrote: post #9
yladiz wrote: post #7

Serious question: how popular is Elm? I've recently seen some tutorials showing up and anecdotally know some friends that have played around with it, but I haven't seen any job postings for it and so I'm wondering if it's just hyped up or if there is real demand for Elm developers professionally.

Neither, really. I'd say it has the largest community out of the various compile-to-js statically typed FP langs, at least with an explicit front-end focus. - PureScript has a small but passionate community, one of the biggest players in that community laid off their whole ps team so that doesn't bode well. - ReasonML fractured into ReScript but left half the Reason community behind, it's a confusing space to navigat…

If you don't have the urge to jump off a hill when you see heavy pragmatism, Typescript is very popular and well maintained. My experience is only positive.

I was also wondering, does Blazor work with F#? That could also be an option. Not a front-end focused language but a front-end focused framework, so, there's that.

Re: Elm Compiler Written in Elm

#23

Post by johnday »

egeozcan wrote: post #22
pd-andy wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither, really. I'd say it has the largest community out of the various compile-to-js statically typed FP langs, at least with an explicit front-end focus. - PureScript has a small but passionate community, one of the biggest players in that community laid off their whole ps team so that doesn't bode well. - ReasonML fractured into ReScript but left half the Reason community behind, it's a confusing space to navigat…

If you don't have the urge to jump off a hill when you see heavy pragmatism, Typescript is very popular and well maintained. My experience is only positive. I was also wondering, does Blazor work with F#? That could also be an option. Not a front-end focused language but a front-end focused framework, so, there's that.

I truly believe TypeScript is the only true way forward for frontend web programming.

Now what we really need is a functional dialect which compiles to TypeScript...

Re: Elm Compiler Written in Elm

#24

Post by pd-andy »

egeozcan wrote: post #22
pd-andy wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither, really. I'd say it has the largest community out of the various compile-to-js statically typed FP langs, at least with an explicit front-end focus. - PureScript has a small but passionate community, one of the biggest players in that community laid off their whole ps team so that doesn't bode well. - ReasonML fractured into ReScript but left half the Reason community behind, it's a confusing space to navigat…

If you don't have the urge to jump off a hill when you see heavy pragmatism, Typescript is very popular and well maintained. My experience is only positive. I was also wondering, does Blazor work with F#? That could also be an option. Not a front-end focused language but a front-end focused framework, so, there's that.

Oh yeah I knew I was forgetting one, F#/Fable seems really popular among F# devs, but it doesn't seem like it's picking up any traction for FE devs that aren't already in that community.

Typescript encourages and is generally more conducive to a different style of programming. That's OK (in fact, clearly it's more than OK given its popularity) but it's not really the sort of thing I want to be writing. I think it's worse if you commit to something like fp-ts or the fantasyland stuff, personally.

Re: Elm Compiler Written in Elm

#25

Post by tester89 »

vanderZwan wrote: post #6
lisardman wrote: post #3

Sad that they have to put a massive "Non-goals" full of emojis so the main Elm team does't feel threated. A languange doesn't lose anything with an extra compiler - a competing compiler is actually what Elm needs right now.

I don't see how the emojis have anything to do with that section, since they're all over the readme anyway. Aside from that: what they're stating is that they "don't want to and aren't planning to divide the community into multiple Elm derivatives, and will actively try to prevent that". Not dividing the community is not the same thing as threatening the main Elm team. And for a smallish language like Elm it makes se…

I assume it's a reference to https://lukeplant.me.uk/blog/posts/why-im-leaving-elm/

Re: Elm Compiler Written in Elm

#26

Post by lisardman »

vanderZwan wrote: post #6
lisardman wrote: post #3

Sad that they have to put a massive "Non-goals" full of emojis so the main Elm team does't feel threated. A languange doesn't lose anything with an extra compiler - a competing compiler is actually what Elm needs right now.

I don't see how the emojis have anything to do with that section, since they're all over the readme anyway. Aside from that: what they're stating is that they "don't want to and aren't planning to divide the community into multiple Elm derivatives, and will actively try to prevent that". Not dividing the community is not the same thing as threatening the main Elm team. And for a smallish language like Elm it makes se…

To give a bit context, Elm main team has been defensive against forks. They are preventing development of features they don’t think worth to them. It’s not possible to publish packages with low-level access without Elm main team approval. The compiler even has built-in DRM about that. My point is more compilers is exactly what Elm needs to flourish. C has several compilers. Python has even”jython”. That doesn’t make a language community weaker.

Re: Elm Compiler Written in Elm

#27

Post by otabdeveloper4 »

lisardman wrote: post #26
vanderZwan wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see how the emojis have anything to do with that section, since they're all over the readme anyway. Aside from that: what they're stating is that they "don't want to and aren't planning to divide the community into multiple Elm derivatives, and will actively try to prevent that". Not dividing the community is not the same thing as threatening the main Elm team. And for a smallish language like Elm it makes se…

To give a bit context, Elm main team has been defensive against forks. They are preventing development of features they don’t think worth to them. It’s not possible to publish packages with low-level access without Elm main team approval. The compiler even has built-in DRM about that. My point is more compilers is exactly what Elm needs to flourish. C has several compilers. Python has even”jython”. That doesn’t make…

We may live to see the day, hopefully, (a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away) where language designers join the 1970's and learn about open standards.

Their mind will be blown, probably.

Re: Elm Compiler Written in Elm

#28

Post by square_usual »

lisardman wrote: post #26
vanderZwan wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see how the emojis have anything to do with that section, since they're all over the readme anyway. Aside from that: what they're stating is that they "don't want to and aren't planning to divide the community into multiple Elm derivatives, and will actively try to prevent that". Not dividing the community is not the same thing as threatening the main Elm team. And for a smallish language like Elm it makes se…

To give a bit context, Elm main team has been defensive against forks. They are preventing development of features they don’t think worth to them. It’s not possible to publish packages with low-level access without Elm main team approval. The compiler even has built-in DRM about that. My point is more compilers is exactly what Elm needs to flourish. C has several compilers. Python has even”jython”. That doesn’t make…

> It’s not possible to publish packages with low-level access without Elm main team approval. The compiler even has built-in DRM about that.

Not calling you out or anything, but could you give a reference on that? I'm curious about what they're doing with a "DRM" in the compiler.

Re: Elm Compiler Written in Elm

#29

Post by [deleted] »

otabdeveloper4 wrote: post #27
lisardman wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To give a bit context, Elm main team has been defensive against forks. They are preventing development of features they don’t think worth to them. It’s not possible to publish packages with low-level access without Elm main team approval. The compiler even has built-in DRM about that. My point is more compilers is exactly what Elm needs to flourish. C has several compilers. Python has even”jython”. That doesn’t make…

We may live to see the day, hopefully, (a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away) where language designers join the 1970's and learn about open standards. Their mind will be blown, probably.

[deleted]

Re: Elm Compiler Written in Elm

#30

Post by [deleted] »

square_usual wrote: post #28
lisardman wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To give a bit context, Elm main team has been defensive against forks. They are preventing development of features they don’t think worth to them. It’s not possible to publish packages with low-level access without Elm main team approval. The compiler even has built-in DRM about that. My point is more compilers is exactly what Elm needs to flourish. C has several compilers. Python has even”jython”. That doesn’t make…

> It’s not possible to publish packages with low-level access without Elm main team approval. The compiler even has built-in DRM about that. Not calling you out or anything, but could you give a reference on that? I'm curious about what they're doing with a "DRM" in the compiler.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN