News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Putting Down Elm. Parent comment

Re:Putting Down Elm by MustardTiger on Monday June 06, 2016 @04:36PM (#11850117)
It seemed to me like elm reduced options all the way to zero for way too many things. Trying to do basic tasks that are trivial in ocaml and haskell ended up with me giving up completely when trying in elm. Just generating random sequences was ridiculous.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Putting Down Elm by spuz on Monday June 06, 2016 @05:04PM (#11850365)
For what it's worth, generating random values is slightly easier with the introduction of subscriptions in 0.17. If that's the version you tried, it would be nice to see why you think Elm is unnecessarily complex compared to Haskell (which is also pure) when it comes to generating random values.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Putting Down Elm by MustardTiger on Monday June 06, 2016 @05:27PM (#11850549)
>If that's the version you tried

No, it was a couple years ago.

>compared to Haskell (which is also pure)

But which has both a real type system and a useful set of base libraries. The lack of basic stuff like monads is really painful in elm.

[ Parent | on HN ]