Not quite: It's planned to target Beam, Erlang's VM. It's an easy fit for Elm. Still, not going to get done any time soon.

Elm on Beam would be some kind of beautiful dream.

Do you have a source for this? I'd be interested in their reasoning.

You'd think Beam would be a very different compile target than JS, and it seems weird to make such a huge change without very good reason.

I think "massive concurrency" and "bulletproof uptimes" are pretty good reasons. Plus that would then allow Elm on both client and server.

The Elm folks have been fairly buddy-buddy with the Elixir/Phoenix folks, so this doesn't surprise me

That sounds amazing.

It makes my heart sing that a different VM than JVM or .Net is gaining more traction, and as a static types fan it makes me happy that a statically typed language may be getting on Beam.

Richard Feldman (who works with Evan Czaplicki at NoRedInk) mentioned it in the Elm slack channel.

http://i.imgur.com/pqk9oMl.png

It will definitely be a very different compile target. But Elm really doesn't take any inspiration from Javascript, so I don't think it will change much about the fundamentals of the language. Of course they'll need to add capabilities for concurrency, OTP, etc.

I think the compile target is basically not a big problem, and there's been explicit work to make the Browser just one Platform. Also, see the `Process` module in the core docs for a hint of the future, regardless of where it lands (this would also work well for WebWorkers etc, and is handled right now by a naive scheduler). Concern over the compile target should be super low - if you've built a language of sorts, you should have a feel for how it's not that big of a deal to tweak the target.

This is a great idea as Beam doesn't force typing like JavaScript so it would be a great add. I wonder how they are going to tie in OTP?