Re:Elm is Wrong
by pka on Wednesday November 09, 2016 @08:42AM
(#12910139)
It's only because Elm is basic Haskell minus a lot of stuff. So basically if you know Haskell you already know Elm (so you need the 15 minutes to get up to speed wrt ports and subscriptions or whatever), but at the same time miss the stuff that has been left out that you take for granted, hence the failed attempt of the author to get some of that back.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Elm is Wrong
by logicallee on Wednesday November 09, 2016 @09:08AM
(#12910320)
That could have been presented much more clearly in the article.
It would be interesting to compare with the opinion/experience of someone who didn't know Haskell, well, right? (Though in that case perhaps the learning curve is too steep, maybe Elm isn't meant for that.)
Actually, that's the thing: Elm is designed for people who don't know Haskell. It's designed for JavaScript developers who are attracted by the "no runtime exceptions" claim.
If you're coming from Haskell, you'll see Elm as a dumbed down, stripped version of Haskell, which will trigger in you the feelings it triggered in the OP.
Re:Elm is Wrong
by logicallee on Wednesday November 09, 2016 @10:04AM
(#12910731)
Thanks. The chances we'll hear the perspective from a javascript dev with no haskell exp are slim though.