Re:Why I’m Leaving Elm
by asdfasgasdgasdg on Thursday April 09, 2020 @04:36PM
(#22826927)
The comment immediately before rtfeldman's references patching the compiler for this project, which is an implied necessity if js code is to continue to be used. It's essentially a soft-fork, and that is what rtfeldman is objecting to.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Thanks, fair enough although rtfeldman appears to be responding to spookeylukey about divergent design goals, while it's norpan who is talking about maintaining a locally patched compiler.
I still see no objections to maintaining a fork or local patch from rtfeldman. Just "if you go against our explicit design goals don't expect us to want to merge it upstream for first-class support".
TBH a locally patched compiler sounds like not a huge deal to me. I have lived with locally patched GCCs before :-)
But maybe I'm unusual. I surprised someone, once, when they found some code not working and I suggested they look at their compiler source for the cause. Their response: "Wow, I hadn't ever thought of the compiler as something that might have a bug, let alone read and modify it".