lol, what did they smoke to think that's reasonable?!

It’s their language, they can do as they wish.

That doesn't make it any more reasonable.

No one is contesting the physical ability, just the wisdom.

Permalink https://github.com/gren-lang/compiler/blob/e665e521367eeedec...

Wild. Do you know why is that code here?

that stuff gets run on every compile (transpile?)? yet it seems that any would-be forker could easily remove that stuff? surely this must all be an elaborate gag or something.

Only on the first compile. It doesn’t perform this check when loading a package from the build cache.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but that code seemingly only applies to kernel packages, i.e. packages which are made by the gren team [1]

Seems more like a check to make sure the version of the JS is compatible with the version of gren than anything else.

[1] https://github.com/gren-lang/compiler/blob/e665e521367eeedec...

There are certain operations that only "kernel" packages are allowed to do. If that weren't the case, then this would indeed be little more than an obscure quirk.

Ah I see. So non-kernel packages do not have access to native modules at all? I believe in Elm native modules were still possible, just not publishing them to the package database. But in this case I guess you wouldn't be able to put a native module in a GitHub repository and then pull this in as a dependency, which is equally rubbish.

Edit: EdwardDiego's answer clarified this for me

Elm doesn’t allow kernel code in externel packages. Gren is performing the exact same check, it’s just that Gren uses Git as a package manager and so has to do it in a different way.

That's only for their "kernel code" though, right? Huh, yeah, looks like it bans non-Elm(Gren) code [0].

And found a great bug where it broke their own code. [1]

[0]: https://github.com/gren-lang/compiler/blob/main/docs/kernel_...

[1]: https://github.com/gren-lang/compiler/issues/203

It baffles me why anyone would fork Elm just to recreate one of it’s greatest mistakes.

Not even recreate, make the same mistake but even more intensely. It's impressive, in some ways.

I think this is an unfair opinion of Gren.

In the past, while using Elm, if you wanted to support some browser API that Elm didn't support yet you would have to fallback to kernel code. What Elm wanted: a core package that provided this low-level kernel package that provided typesafety at the Elm level. But as we know, this was a pipe dream because you could never contribute to Elm unless it was from the Elm dictator itself, or from his inner circle of cool people.

It seems like Gren is already ahead of this. Gren has community members actively working on the Websocket API to provide a typesafe core package with Kernel bindings.

The question is: will Gren keep being open to contributors that can provide kernel code.

That’s the plan

Meet the new boss same as the old boss. Its a shame really. Elm seemed so promising a few years ago. I still like the ideas behind the project but the history of Elm is not confidence inspiring.