News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Elm 0.19 Broke Us by iodiniemetra on Saturday August 25, 2018 @06:17PM (#17842885)
That's not the takeaway that you should have - simplicity doesn't matter if minor language versions make breaks.
[dead]
Re:Elm 0.19 Broke Us by alluro2 on Saturday August 25, 2018 @08:23PM (#17843423)
While I agree about it being ok to break things at this stage, some of the words in your reply were a bit confusing - what do you mean a "private unsupported API" in an open source project? Kind of supports the notion that this is a private group project and others can use it, but are not welcome to participate.

Also, if calling this a minor release is idiotic, why was the version number then a minor increase (at least according to commonly accepted understanding, i.e. semver) and not a 0.20 or whatever else, especially if there are breaking API changes.

Re:Elm 0.19 Broke Us by uryga on Saturday August 25, 2018 @10:57PM (#17843962)
GP probably meant something like "an internal API that's exposed in case you need it but gives no guarantees about stability because it's still evolving"
Re:Elm 0.19 Broke Us by knewter on Sunday August 26, 2018 @02:25AM (#17844580)
> Kind of supports the notion that this is a private group project and others can use it, but are not welcome to participate.

Native's existence was an implementation detail. no one using it didn't know it was likely to go away if they read anything about it from core. it was undocumented, but where you could find any documentation it said very clearly not to use it. people used it anyway. I was one. but I knew going in that it would likely disappear.

> why was the version number then a minor increase (at least according to commonly accepted understanding, i.e. semver) and not a 0.20 or whatever else, especially if there are breaking API changes.

https://semver.org/#spec-item-4

you not understanding semver doesn't make elm bad

Re:Elm 0.19 Broke Us by fulafel on Sunday August 26, 2018 @06:30AM (#17845234)
Elm doesn't seem to use semver (which requires that "A normal version number MUST take the form X.Y.Z")
Re:Elm 0.19 Broke Us by vmchale on Sunday August 26, 2018 @09:31PM (#17848881)
Clearly the internal API existed because Evan et al. decided they needed to use it. So why did they decide it a feature that was so obviously necessary was too complicated for the hoi polloi?
Re:Elm 0.19 Broke Us by mst on Sunday August 26, 2018 @03:12PM (#17847333)
I asked upthread about native versus ports and somebody was kind enough to mention ports were async only.

But I'm still curious about exactly what people were using native for and why at least some users don't feel they can rewrite easily - care to share what you used and why, and what your thoughts are about replacing it?

(the discussion around this has, so far as I've been able to see, devoid of concrete examples, and now the question's nerd sniped me :)

Re:Elm 0.19 Broke Us by Zyst on Saturday August 25, 2018 @09:23PM (#17843657)
In semver versions before 1.0 are prerelease versions.