11–20 of 218 posts
>I have complaints about Elm after using it during a quick hack session.
Put another way: if you try something and find it flawed—why should you put any more time and effort into it? And yet, that doesn't mean the problems you found were not real. If anything, those problems might be the most relevant because they forced you to put the tool down.
The article makes some great points; however, the title is not particularly useful nor a good summary of the article itself.
So he then decides he wants to have the full Elm experience by trying to replicate a Haskell solution in Elm using a technique that was mentioned in an issue comment. I feel like in trying to avoid the blub paradox, he ran right into it.
>I have complaints about Elm after using it during a quick hack session.
The post is opinionated and a bit aggresively worded. But his(/her?) major complaint is valid: lack of type classes, which completely kills essential composability and generic properties of Haskell. And the module system doesn't offer MLs features to make up for it (signatures). This means that Elm requires boilerplate for things that are elegantly handled by type classes. You may also look at Purescript [1], a more…
What's a good alternative to Elm?
What's a good alternative to Elm?
Maybe look into https://github.com/clojure/clojurescript ?